Its not been a flop t all its why better and coherent under him than under Kirkwood, lately its gone a bit pear shaped but hes done some fantastic things for the show.
I don't think that DTC's reign is a flop. However, I think that he needs to get over his Carters obsession. They aren't the only good family in the show.
I don't think that DTC's reign is a flop. However, I think that he needs to get over his Carters obsession. They aren't the only good family in the show.
I think the show is far more entertaining than it had been for the couple of years prior to him taking over and has a few moments of brilliance here and there. But he has just become overly obsessed with 'shock twists' pulled out from thin air.
I do think the Kat twist is a bit much. I have to say if I had been heavily involved in bringing the initial story to life back in 2001, I'd be a bit miffed to see some twist-crazy hotshot messing with my baby.
Killer Cameron in Emmerdale had a lot of people talking about it. I know quite a few people who hadn't watched ED up to that point but started watching it then and have remained watching it.
Ah yes that's a good example. I don't actually watch Emmerdale myself but I have heard of that storyline and correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the storyline begin on a live episode?
This is something that both DTC and saint Santer got wrong with the live episodes in my opinion. They used them to wrap up long running storylines but offered little to entice new viewers, or win back old viewers and maintain the high audiences generated from all the publicity. The only new story's that kicked off from the live episodes were Kim giving birth, and Vincent and Kathy appearing. No one really knows anything about Vincent yet so he's hardly likely to be a big draw and it was soon publicised after Kathy first appeared that she wouldn't reappear until the autumn so again that's not going to keep viewers hooked over the summer.
Another example were Neighbours recent anniversary celebrations. I haven't watched the show in years but started to when I read about various characters coming back for the anniversary but they also kicked up a couple of story's during that time which have kept me hooked since.
It's a shame because DTC did say that they'd learn't their mistakes from the previous anniversary episodes but in my opinion they didn't.
I think the show is far more entertaining than it had been for the couple of years prior to him taking over and has a few moments of brilliance here and there. But he has just become overly obsessed with 'shock twists' pulled out from thin air.
I do think the Kat twist is a bit much. I have to say if I had been heavily involved in bringing the initial story to life back in 2001, I'd be a bit miffed to see some twist-crazy hotshot messing with my baby.
I think that's a very good point. The original story was self contained and perfect. This new twist is potentially damaging. Having said that it may be just what Kat needs. Shame they wasted all that secret baby bollocks on Shirley though. That's 3 secret babies in a year!!
I think that he's doing a great job, he has his shortcomings but every producer does.
Yes we've had a few sensationalist twists this year but this team has a real knack for putting the character at the heart of the drama. They really get the characters and they can pull off more outlandish plot turns with the credibliity of the show still intact.
They've found original stories for some iconic characters; Ian's got a child killer, Sharon's going to find her real dad and Kat's got a secret son. None of these stories contradict the history of the show, two of them actually add to established facts. We haven't had a child killer since Brookside, this is original for EastEnders and with a transgender story on the horizon, it's clear that this team want to take risks and explore new ground whilst also remaining true to the show's rich history.
Shabnam's secret and Stacey's key have shown that the team can plan long-term and establish complex and nuanced arcs. Seeds are always being planted with red herrings and twists aplenty. Shabnam returned a very different woman to the one who left Walford and we've slowly learned why she is the way she is, again it only added to what we knew about the character filling in another little gap in her story just like Vincent is with Ronnie. These people know the show and more importantly they know the characters.
The rape story also saw a new take on a story that all soaps have tackled. Yes it has made for uncomfortable viewing but rape isn't meant to be all sweetness and light. Dean isn't your average rapist; young, handsome and troubled. We know why he is the way he is. It's a complex portrayal that doesn't have a panto villian at its heart further challenging people conceptions to rape. There's no rapist stereotypes and unfortunately, there aren't many convictions.
Kathy's return is still an enigma to us but it has the makings of an epic story. DTC has promised that it won't be easy for Kathy and just like we never saw Den floating in the canal, we never saw Kathy's dead body. The jury is out on whether or not it will be convincing but I'm willing to wait before casting judgement. This will heavily involve the Beales and Mitchells. If anyone can pull it off they can. Look how great Stacey has been since her return. It's time to right another wrong. Kathy should never have been killed off.
Hopefully Linda giving birth to the roya-l Carter in the Linda Wing will move the Carters on and along with the lottery win, will bring some happiness to Walford. Rumour has it that Kalfie will smile this week. Yes the Carters are overexposed but it's the B&B refugees I have a problem with. Shirley should forget about Mick. She didn't mention him for 7 years so that shouldn't be hard and stop hanging around them like a bad smell with her sidekick, BusterBloodVessel. Shirley has had her day and it's time she stopped hogging screentime and sticking her beak in where it isn't needed. If she loved Mick, she'd leave Walford.
I think that's a very good point. The original story was self contained and perfect. This new twist is potentially damaging. Having said that it may be just what Kat needs. Shame they wasted all that secret baby bollocks on Shirley though. That's 3 secret babies in a year!![/QUOTE]
4 if you factor in Sharon being a secret baby herself!
I think that's a very good point. The original story was self contained and perfect. This new twist is potentially damaging. Having said that it may be just what Kat needs. Shame they wasted all that secret baby bollocks on Shirley though. That's 3 secret babies in a year!![/QUOTE]
4 if you factor in Sharon being a secret baby herself!
I think that's a very good point. The original story was self contained and perfect. This new twist is potentially damaging. Having said that it may be just what Kat needs. Shame they wasted all that secret baby bollocks on Shirley though. That's 3 secret babies in a year!![/QUOTE]
4 if you factor in Sharon being a secret baby herself!
I do think the Kat twist is a bit much. I have to say if I had been heavily involved in bringing the initial story to life back in 2001, I'd be a bit miffed to see some twist-crazy hotshot messing with my baby.
For all we know Tony Jordan was consulted on the twist and gave his approval. Producers build on the work of their predecessors all the time.
I know when Kathy returned, Treadwell-Collins mentioned looking back to the original 2006 episodes which saw her killed off before going ahead with the idea of her return, and I presume this is common practice for storylines like this.
I am more than happy with DTC's reign and hope it continues,
I don't need to have storylines wrapped up in three episodes I have the patience to watch things develop naturally (remember Janine's 'agoraphobia ' which was exhibited diagnosed and resolved in the space of a week?!)
I don't mind learning something that I didn't know about a character's history, Kat having twins, Sharon's real dad being known to Den, it adds a different dimension to a family we think we know everything about - much the same as when Vicky discovered the existence of Dennis
I don't need to have everything set out for me in simple terms, I like to mull things over and ponder the possibilities myself after the episode is over
and I think DTC has done well to develop the new characters who have worked and quickly discarded the ones that didn't, his frequent reminders of the history of the show either by reintroducing old characters or by the reminiscing's of current characters are a joy
A day on DS wouldnt be the same without people trying to troll
Its not trolling, I agree there are a lot of similar threads, but we get them about stuart the hat in CS as well. It is a genuine question.
Best to avoid them if you feel that way! ;-)
In answer to the question he has done a lot of good, but is now undoing some of that work with messy sensational storylines that are not needed. When you loose creditability it is a slippery slope. I miss Santer, but he has gone onto other projects working for itv. There were many rumours about him taking on CS?
Producers should be seen not heard he shouldn't have a Twitter account whilst producing the show.
He needs to stop turning the show into a farce the fans are beginning to turn on him, not entirely his fault though the show has been on the decline since 2010 he's tried to recapture that successful period but failed miserably.
You seem to be struggling with the concept of discussion forums. It could be that if you become upset with views which conflict with your own that forums such as these are simply not for you.
Personally, I'm critical of the programme at the moment because I care. I used to really enjoy it and I sing its praises when it's good, and for me it's sad to see what it has become.
I want it to improve and I find it cathartic to express my frustrations about here. Funnily enough, here on a soap discussion forum.
I hope that helps you to understand a little better where I am coming from.
I think many people here need to remember what a 'discussion' is though. Perhaps people are struggling with what the concept of 'discussion'. Repeating the same thing over and over again, in countless threads that are all on the same subject, isn't a discussion, it's nothing short of preaching and raving.
I'm not against a discussion thread on the displeasure of DTC many people have, but do we really need so many? Do we really need this displeasure forced into every single discussion of EastEnders? If there was one thread, it could be easily ignored by those who are bored of the discussion. But they're bloody everywhere.
Also, when you discuss things, you usually bring up new points of debate. All we have on Digital Spy is the same old tripe: "the Carters are in it too much", "DTC is a flop", "Axe DTC now". It's the same old lines, endlessly repeated, and for some reason, instead of posters putting their opinions in one of the MANY threads dedicated to the subject, they believe their opinion is important enough to warrant a brand new thread to clog up the forum!
I don't want you to think this is against your thread personally. This thread just happened to be the one I wrote in, the straw and the camel's back, so to speak. I just don't understand why people start new threads on existing subjects... I mean, has your original post said anything that hasn't been said before?! If not, why does it need a new thread? This is a discussion forum, not a blog. If you want to rant and rave and have people 'comment' on it, start a blog.
It's just frustrating to log in and see several threads on the same subject over and over again. It's like walking through a street and having several church preachers bombard you with their beliefs at the same time...
And if you genuinely want EE to improve, you would stop watching... That's the only way the BBC can gather whether or not people are enjoying it or not. If you watch it, you're just another seemingly satisfied customer, another loyal viewer... The same way that constantly buying Ice Creams would suggest a fondness for frozen dairy...
Producers should be seen not heard he shouldn't have a Twitter account whilst producing the show.
He needs to stop turning the show into a farce the fans are beginning to turn on him, not entirely his fault though the show has been on the decline since 2010 he's tried to recapture that successful period but failed miserably.
I like that he has a Twitter account its good that he and other producers, writers etc interact with the fans, American shows do this all the time now, live tweeting along with the show I think its the way to go.
The anniversary was almost 3 months ago now, that excuse is valid for about a month and tbh it shouldn't even be an excuse at all. 'Because we've had a big week, we'll shut down for ages, we don't care about entertaining the audience'. Corrie and Emmerdale didn't stop producing gripping drama after their 50th & 40th anniversaries, so why should EastEnders be excused?:p.
The viewing figures have fallen off a cliff since the live week
Little wonder after the pathetic Lucy reveal. I'm sure plenty of people who just tuned in because of the live week hoo ha tuned straight back out again after that crap.
I don't think his reign has been a complete flop so far but there has been a LOT wrong with it. Maybe 65-70 % rubbish compared to Kirkwood's 99%. The good bits have been really terrific but there just aren't enough of them, especially recently. After a strong start things have dwindled and got less and less consistent.
Producers should be seen not heard he shouldn't have a Twitter account whilst producing the show.
He needs to stop turning the show into a farce the fans are beginning to turn on him, not entirely his fault though the show has been on the decline since 2010 he's tried to recapture that successful period but failed miserably.
Why shouldn't he have twitter, surely it's his business and no one else's that he chooses to do so?
1. Kat Having Twins Back in 1984- Unrealistic
2. Kathy Coming Back- She died off screen in 2006
3. Turning Deonos character into a rapist
4. Shabnam having a secret child with Deano
5. The whole Lucy Reveal was ruined with Bobby being the killer
6. Axing Kirsty a character who could have given more to the show
7. Bringing back Peggy Mitchell for the 30th anniversary and poorly using her
8. Putting Dot in prison for Nicks death- Her character is getting ruined
9. The whole Shirley/Mick reveal was also badly done with the same time as the Linda/Deano storyline. Should have been separate.
10. Bringing back a lot of characters from the past e.g Sonia, Stacey who really don't have a purpose on the show anymore along with recasting Martin Fowler.
Comments
they arent a good family full stop.
Haha.
I do think the Kat twist is a bit much. I have to say if I had been heavily involved in bringing the initial story to life back in 2001, I'd be a bit miffed to see some twist-crazy hotshot messing with my baby.
Ah yes that's a good example. I don't actually watch Emmerdale myself but I have heard of that storyline and correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the storyline begin on a live episode?
This is something that both DTC and saint Santer got wrong with the live episodes in my opinion. They used them to wrap up long running storylines but offered little to entice new viewers, or win back old viewers and maintain the high audiences generated from all the publicity. The only new story's that kicked off from the live episodes were Kim giving birth, and Vincent and Kathy appearing. No one really knows anything about Vincent yet so he's hardly likely to be a big draw and it was soon publicised after Kathy first appeared that she wouldn't reappear until the autumn so again that's not going to keep viewers hooked over the summer.
Another example were Neighbours recent anniversary celebrations. I haven't watched the show in years but started to when I read about various characters coming back for the anniversary but they also kicked up a couple of story's during that time which have kept me hooked since.
It's a shame because DTC did say that they'd learn't their mistakes from the previous anniversary episodes but in my opinion they didn't.
I think that's a very good point. The original story was self contained and perfect. This new twist is potentially damaging. Having said that it may be just what Kat needs. Shame they wasted all that secret baby bollocks on Shirley though. That's 3 secret babies in a year!!
Yes we've had a few sensationalist twists this year but this team has a real knack for putting the character at the heart of the drama. They really get the characters and they can pull off more outlandish plot turns with the credibliity of the show still intact.
They've found original stories for some iconic characters; Ian's got a child killer, Sharon's going to find her real dad and Kat's got a secret son. None of these stories contradict the history of the show, two of them actually add to established facts. We haven't had a child killer since Brookside, this is original for EastEnders and with a transgender story on the horizon, it's clear that this team want to take risks and explore new ground whilst also remaining true to the show's rich history.
Shabnam's secret and Stacey's key have shown that the team can plan long-term and establish complex and nuanced arcs. Seeds are always being planted with red herrings and twists aplenty. Shabnam returned a very different woman to the one who left Walford and we've slowly learned why she is the way she is, again it only added to what we knew about the character filling in another little gap in her story just like Vincent is with Ronnie. These people know the show and more importantly they know the characters.
The rape story also saw a new take on a story that all soaps have tackled. Yes it has made for uncomfortable viewing but rape isn't meant to be all sweetness and light. Dean isn't your average rapist; young, handsome and troubled. We know why he is the way he is. It's a complex portrayal that doesn't have a panto villian at its heart further challenging people conceptions to rape. There's no rapist stereotypes and unfortunately, there aren't many convictions.
Kathy's return is still an enigma to us but it has the makings of an epic story. DTC has promised that it won't be easy for Kathy and just like we never saw Den floating in the canal, we never saw Kathy's dead body. The jury is out on whether or not it will be convincing but I'm willing to wait before casting judgement. This will heavily involve the Beales and Mitchells. If anyone can pull it off they can. Look how great Stacey has been since her return. It's time to right another wrong. Kathy should never have been killed off.
Hopefully Linda giving birth to the roya-l Carter in the Linda Wing will move the Carters on and along with the lottery win, will bring some happiness to Walford. Rumour has it that Kalfie will smile this week. Yes the Carters are overexposed but it's the B&B refugees I have a problem with. Shirley should forget about Mick. She didn't mention him for 7 years so that shouldn't be hard
I know when Kathy returned, Treadwell-Collins mentioned looking back to the original 2006 episodes which saw her killed off before going ahead with the idea of her return, and I presume this is common practice for storylines like this.
There WAS a pay off, I need to be fair and admit that. Can the storyline please now end and can Kat become a more normal adjusted person please?
I don't need to have storylines wrapped up in three episodes I have the patience to watch things develop naturally (remember Janine's 'agoraphobia ' which was exhibited diagnosed and resolved in the space of a week?!)
I don't mind learning something that I didn't know about a character's history, Kat having twins, Sharon's real dad being known to Den, it adds a different dimension to a family we think we know everything about - much the same as when Vicky discovered the existence of Dennis
I don't need to have everything set out for me in simple terms, I like to mull things over and ponder the possibilities myself after the episode is over
and I think DTC has done well to develop the new characters who have worked and quickly discarded the ones that didn't, his frequent reminders of the history of the show either by reintroducing old characters or by the reminiscing's of current characters are a joy
Its not trolling, I agree there are a lot of similar threads, but we get them about stuart the hat in CS as well. It is a genuine question.
Best to avoid them if you feel that way! ;-)
In answer to the question he has done a lot of good, but is now undoing some of that work with messy sensational storylines that are not needed. When you loose creditability it is a slippery slope. I miss Santer, but he has gone onto other projects working for itv. There were many rumours about him taking on CS?
It's called being a fan. I would say I am a concerned fan. ;-)
He needs to stop turning the show into a farce the fans are beginning to turn on him, not entirely his fault though the show has been on the decline since 2010 he's tried to recapture that successful period but failed miserably.
I think many people here need to remember what a 'discussion' is though. Perhaps people are struggling with what the concept of 'discussion'. Repeating the same thing over and over again, in countless threads that are all on the same subject, isn't a discussion, it's nothing short of preaching and raving.
I'm not against a discussion thread on the displeasure of DTC many people have, but do we really need so many? Do we really need this displeasure forced into every single discussion of EastEnders? If there was one thread, it could be easily ignored by those who are bored of the discussion. But they're bloody everywhere.
Also, when you discuss things, you usually bring up new points of debate. All we have on Digital Spy is the same old tripe: "the Carters are in it too much", "DTC is a flop", "Axe DTC now". It's the same old lines, endlessly repeated, and for some reason, instead of posters putting their opinions in one of the MANY threads dedicated to the subject, they believe their opinion is important enough to warrant a brand new thread to clog up the forum!
I don't want you to think this is against your thread personally. This thread just happened to be the one I wrote in, the straw and the camel's back, so to speak. I just don't understand why people start new threads on existing subjects... I mean, has your original post said anything that hasn't been said before?! If not, why does it need a new thread? This is a discussion forum, not a blog. If you want to rant and rave and have people 'comment' on it, start a blog.
It's just frustrating to log in and see several threads on the same subject over and over again. It's like walking through a street and having several church preachers bombard you with their beliefs at the same time...
And if you genuinely want EE to improve, you would stop watching... That's the only way the BBC can gather whether or not people are enjoying it or not. If you watch it, you're just another seemingly satisfied customer, another loyal viewer... The same way that constantly buying Ice Creams would suggest a fondness for frozen dairy...
I like that he has a Twitter account its good that he and other producers, writers etc interact with the fans, American shows do this all the time now, live tweeting along with the show I think its the way to go.
I agree.
Little wonder after the pathetic Lucy reveal. I'm sure plenty of people who just tuned in because of the live week hoo ha tuned straight back out again after that crap.
I don't think his reign has been a complete flop so far but there has been a LOT wrong with it. Maybe 65-70 % rubbish compared to Kirkwood's 99%. The good bits have been really terrific but there just aren't enough of them, especially recently. After a strong start things have dwindled and got less and less consistent.
Why shouldn't he have twitter, surely it's his business and no one else's that he chooses to do so?
2. Kathy Coming Back- She died off screen in 2006
3. Turning Deonos character into a rapist
4. Shabnam having a secret child with Deano
5. The whole Lucy Reveal was ruined with Bobby being the killer
6. Axing Kirsty a character who could have given more to the show
7. Bringing back Peggy Mitchell for the 30th anniversary and poorly using her
8. Putting Dot in prison for Nicks death- Her character is getting ruined
9. The whole Shirley/Mick reveal was also badly done with the same time as the Linda/Deano storyline. Should have been separate.
10. Bringing back a lot of characters from the past e.g Sonia, Stacey who really don't have a purpose on the show anymore along with recasting Martin Fowler.