Options
Its high time DTC made one important change to contracts
Kenkennedykenne
Posts: 3,278 Forum Member
✭✭✭
He needs to make sure that whilst they are contracted to Eastenders, the stars don't appear in any other TV show, such as Our Girl etc..., nor do they go off to Pantomimes, or touring with bands etc, that way, we will not need contrived reasons for their character to disappear for a few months. It is just unrealistic
0
Comments
The reasons aren't that bad. The worst consequence was Amy missing a whole term of school and Roxy not getting any letters/fines.
What then Lindsey coulson decides to leave next or Michael French sometimes when one persons axed or killed off we see someone that's close to them then announcing they've quit I think a lot of stars on EastEnders at the minute have more power over DTC. With previous bosses killing off so many classic characters DTC really can't afford to lose people like Lindsey coulson, michael French
Can't stand Bianca, hate everything about her character and I think she's meant to be on of those characters you root for, when all I want to do is shut her fat gob permanently and make her leave EE forever.
I do get the argument that some actors might leave but I don't think they'd be many and in all honesty, some of the ones that might go I think have done their beat work anyway and they will just complacently stay until their dotage whilst not contributing that much - after all they're getting it easy aren't they, goof pay packet, long holdays, allowed to do other work, and all because they are sure the show 'needs' them.
I don't see the problem. Characters go off screen for weeks at a time anyway when the focus is on somebody else, so letting the actor go and do something else in the meantime is fair enough.
They're essentially self employed anyway.
What has other people needing jobs got to do with it? The actors and actresses are probably on retainers when they take time off. When they film they work long hours and work hard.
I can see the argument for the returnees if they had other work already scheduled. I also don't have a problem with it happening once every few years. It is the people that have a 2 or 3 month breadk (which is too long to leave unexplained on screen) every one or two years and the panto thing does annoy me as so many are involved at the same time. It's not as bad when it is spread through the year and only one character at a time. But when you get this thing of plots coming to a huge head at Christmas and then the people involved just disappear for 6 weeks in January and February with weak explanations. I actually prefer it when they don't actually write them out and just aren't seen but again that is possible for a couple of weeks (like Phil this January) but not when it is 3 months like Max or Bianca.
She takes all her yearly holidays at once. So the full six weeks summer holidays is when Patsy takes her break. She has no other time off aside from this. Patsy asked EE if they were able to fix this arrangement for her and they agreed. That's their decision to make.
Patsy was one of the highest featuring EastEnders actors in 2013 and so far in 2014 she has appeared in 33 of the 47 episodes.
Don't let facts get in the way of a good moan.
I remember in her first stint Ronnie would disappear for months on end. The actress wasn't going doing anything else it was just downtime for the character after being involved with stories.
I don't think there's any actor/character who is unrealistically disappearing every 2-3 months?
Great post.
Nobody is disputing what Patsy does - we are all aware that she isn't getting more time off than others, just taking it in one go but that doesn't change the fact that it has to be written in to the show each year which many believe to have a detrimental effect on the show. She had every right ti ask and the Producers agreed - I'm not blaming her for that. However the question the OP asked was whether the Producers are right to agree to such requests and whether it hurts the show. It is my view it does, others disagree.
The fact is that like any business, one or two weeks break for hiliday can usually be easily covered, 6 in one go can not which is why most businesses have a maximum block holiday allowance - i've never worked anywhere you were allowed to take more than 2 weeks in one except for once in a lifetime events like your wedding when you might be allowed 2 and a half. This is because 2 weeks can be covered by other staff with some work being postponed until you return - any longer thet have to employ a temp or locum which costs money or the work just doesn't get done which adversely affacte the business. The argument here is an actor taking 2 weeks off so the character being off screen for that time doesn't need to be referenced. 6 weeks it does and it is increasingly unbelievable that characters with businesses and young children would just take off for 6 weeks each year or 3 months every other year like Bianca and Max.
EastEnders isn't like a normal job. There are long periods were actors are not used. All the main cast will get the same amount of holidays. No one is getting special treatment, EE chose to allow Patsy six weeks off each summer and she makes up for it by featuring heavily for the rest of the year. So all the periods of Bianca not being used are written around this. Which imho is a better plan. Patsy was one of the highest featured EastEnders actors in 2013 and it will be the same for 2014. The fact she takes her holidays all in one go doesn't effect anything on screen. So there is no issue with what Patsy does. Did anyone even notice she didn't feature last September and October? ;-)
I know she's not getting any more holiday - I acknowledge that there is so 'special' treatment in the amount of leave - just jow she gets to take it. However I think her taking it all in one go does have a detrimental effect on the end product as they have to explain her absence (which they don't when it is spread across the year) and I personally find. It very unrealistic that a mother would leave her young children for nearly 2 months. In that respect the Prison explanation was the best as it was beyond her control.
To the extent that absence needs to be covered and can affect the end product EE is like any other job.
I'm not singling Patsy out - I think Shane Ritchie, Jake Wood, Linda Henry and Steve McFadden's breaks are just as noticeable. I also don't blame her, i'd do it if I could but the issue is whether the Producers are right to agree to something which many (including me) damages the credibility of the show.
It does harm the show - Tanya being a prime example. Maternity leave was fine but then she had two other long periods off. It ruins other characters who rely on her character.
I think Lacey and Sam have both already agreed to work around their othe rcommittments so EE wants them it has to be at their conditions and therefore they have other shows to film.
When a film comes calling for Danny Dyer you bet he will get a break from the show.
Characters used to have a shelf life of 3-5 years. Now its 3 years here, 3 years a few years later and so on. A revolving door. Sometimes this can be good fo rthe show (its realistic characters come back) but on the othe rhand it stumps creativity.
I do agree with this as when Charlie (Janine) took her last break, you barely saw Michael at all but I'm not sure if that was her fault or rather the writers who gave up on him until Janine returned.
It's not jealousy at least on my part. I'd like to have 6 weeks off in one go but not at the expense of all other holiday the rest of the year. My objection is exactly what I've stated - that it hurts the credibility of the show to have people being written out for several weeks at a time. Some characters you can get away with it more - somebody unreliable might just leave their family for several weeks. However a character with young children who is generally portrayed to put their family first like Bianca or Tanya it just isn't realistic that they would leave them for several weeks or even months at a time. If it can be dealt with without actually writing them out on screen (as with Phil this January) then I'm okay with it but when it means coming up with a silly excuse like Bianca's fashion course or Alfie going to Australia for a month I'm not.
The actress didn't request a break. What was supposed to be her break then became a permanent exit.
Pantomime breaks are usually only a month long, so it doesn't make much difference. Plus, it's over Christmas, when cast members usually all go back to work at different times anyway. Ben Hardy, Jamie Borthwick, Danielle Harold and Lorna Fitzgerald had lengthy Christmas breaks, as did June Brown. It never makes that much of an impact on screen other than them not appearing for a while, which is likely to happen even if they didn't have time off.
The 'breaks' have cut down significantly from 2012 when pretty much everyone was going on a 'six month' break.
I'm not talking about this last one though it is somewhat unbelievable that she'd got so settled in just a month that she didn't return to London when she found out Lauren had gone back.
I'm talking more about the 2 months at the beginning of 13 and i' sure there was another one in 11 or 12 after the maternity leave which of course is unavoidable.