You say that as if heritage means nothing. Trust me, to the viewers who have watched Corrie for 30, 40 or 50 years, heritage is extremely important. And if we get rid of all characters over 50 and bring in new younger characters, what are we left with, other than Hollyoaks MkII, (yes, that same HO that can't manage to pull in even one million viewers).
I didn't say that Heritage means nothing, I simply said that characters only being on the show for heritage reasons is silly.
Also I never said that you would get rid of all characters over 50 either, hence why I never mentioned Audrey, Dev, Norris, Sylvia, Roy etc or even said anything remotely like replacing them with young teenagers. I think you are just making things up to suit your arguement.
As an example I don't see many people moaning nowadays that Carla runs the factory instead of Mike Baldwin, in fact she is one of the more popular characters.
Corrie can't carry on living in the 1960's forever. People's tastes change and people move on, it's about time that Corrie was modernised for the current market without losing it's charm.
I disagree, what if these older characters have played out every storyline imaginable over the years apart from death. They are getting on a bit and so their potential is even less, a lot have grown tired and stale over the years and so there is nowhere else to go. Surely it's better to give a fresh character a better role than repeating the same storylines over and over again with the old guard.
Rita's role seems to be to either give advice to Gobby Tina or to stand in Norris' shop all day before going for a drink in the Rovers. If that's all I do when I'm that age, God help me.
Emily's role seems to be to drink a glass of Sherry once a month or to say "oh dear" to Toxic Tracy.
Dennis stands in a shop all day that his new wife used to own or goes to the pub :yawn:
Ken falls out with Deidre every week and despises Tracy. Before his obvious affair storyline pops up once in a while.
Deidre's job is to moan at Ken and stick up for her murdering daughter.
Gail is a parody of herself.
What is the actual point of these characters apart from heritage.
Ageist nonsense. They provide warmth, depth and continuinty to the programme. The reason why EastEnders is on a decline at the momment is because it has lost the long standing stalwarts that are recogniseable to die hard fans. But also recogniseable to people that dip in and out.
I have always watched Corrie but used to dip in and out of EE. I don't anymore because in the last 3 years it has lost to many characters that were EE in my opinion. For example Pat, Pauline and Peggy.
Corrie can't carry on living in the 1960's forever. People's tastes change and people move on, it's about time that Corrie was modernised for the current market without losing it's charm.
I would hardly say it is living in the 1960's. Its problem recently is that it has tried to be modern and politically correct with the inclusion of more LGBT characters. However this failed because at one point the programme was turning into Queer as Folk.
Ask most younger people who their favourite characters are in Corrie. Its not Jason, Gary or Sophie. They usually say Audrey, Deidre, Roy, Hayley, Norris and Sylvia. Why? because they add humour and warmth. They are also characters that are their parents/ grandparents favourites.
Ask most younger people who their favourite characters are in Corrie. Its not Jason, Gary or Sophie. They usually say Audrey, Deidre, Roy, Hayley, Norris and Sylvia. Why? because they add humour and warmth. They are also characters that are their parents/ grandparents favourites.
I think you're missing my point.
Out of the younger characters, only David and Kylie are any good, but that is down to the shoddy writing and casting.
You've basically agreed with me regarding older characters, as I mentioned the names above as good characters. You however left out Emily, Dennis, Rita etc who I said have no place on the show anymore and are only here for heritage reasons.
Ageist nonsense. They provide warmth, depth and continuinty to the programme. The reason why EastEnders is on a decline at the momment is because it has lost the long standing stalwarts that are recogniseable to die hard fans. But also recogniseable to people that dip in and out.
I wouldn't say to get rid of them all straight away, but to phase them out over the next few years. They are easily replaceable.
Would you honestly miss Emily who's barely on the show anymore? would you miss Dennis who was brought back as a plot device? would you miss Rita who pretends she still owns Norris' shop?
Ageist nonsense. They provide warmth, depth and continuinty to the programme. The reason why EastEnders is on a decline at the momment is because it has lost the long standing stalwarts that are recogniseable to die hard fans. But also recogniseable to people that dip in and out.
I have always watched Corrie but used to dip in and out of EE. I don't anymore because in the last 3 years it has lost to many characters that were EE in my opinion. For example Pat, Pauline and Peggy.
This is my list of the ten to go and my personal reasons why. It is the scriptwriters and the people who dream up the story lines to blame and not necessarily the actors' fault.
Sean - Camp but not funny
Paul - Small and boring
Carla - Stories all the same, steals someone's man who then gets killed
Rob - Out of prison and running a factory?!!
Sunita - Personality transplant and now unlikeable
Michelle - Former barmaid running a factory?!! plus she thinks she is God's gift to man
Ryan - New personality to go with new head
Tina - Younger version of Michelle
Tommy - Henpecked
Audrey - Too long in the tooth ( literally) to get so many boyfriends. As if Nigel Havers would look twice at her!!!
Oh my God, please let this be the beginning of the end for Gary. I HATE him sooooo much. Sean is annoying, but I'd rather there were 2 Sean's than one Gary. I hated him and his crappy Army storyline, and now he is obsessed with "our baby", I make a cuppa everytime there is a scene with him. He spoils the whole show for me.
I don't understand those who say Rita and Dennis have no place in the show. Are the watching another show? Rita and Dennis just had a massive story about them falling in love and getting married. Yes they are on the backburner for now, but they are adding comedy like Dennis' turn in the Rovers conning Gloria the other week which was one of the funniest things I've seen in Corrie in a long time.
Rita and Norris relationship seems to have been replaced with Norris and Mary which is awful. Mary is one note character, with no depth, emotion and is just a panto idiot. Rita and Norris was an award winning duo.
Barbara Knox is also the best actress in the show, she can turn on the emotion in the blink of an eye. I love Rita's relationship with Tina, it's one of the only good qualities about Tina these days. I do miss Rita and Sally however.
I don't understand those who say Rita and Dennis have no place in the show. Are the watching another show? Rita and Dennis just had a massive story about them falling in love and getting married. Yes they are on the backburner for now, but they are adding comedy like Dennis' turn in the Rovers conning Gloria the other week which was one of the funniest things I've seen in Corrie in a long time.
Dennis - Homeless and living rough for years, Sophie randomly starts working in a soup kitchen and just so happens to bring him back to the street he once lived in, Rita spots him, he then meets up with his old chums, Eileen and Julie find out that he's a long lost cousin, never mentioned again, him and Rita grow close within a matter of weeks and get married, since then they stand in Norris' shop all day and by night have a quiet drink in the Rovers, unless Mary has another plot device storyline.
Absolutely contrived and thrilling stuff. He's a pointless plot device who was brought back for heritage reasons so they could say they have one of the first characters still on the show. Does he have a purpose..no, is he needed...no, could another character do his storylines...absolutely.
I wouldn't say to get rid of them all straight away, but to phase them out over the next few years. They are easily replaceable.
Would you honestly miss Emily who's barely on the show anymore? would you miss Dennis who was brought back as a plot device? would you miss Rita who pretends she still owns Norris' shop?
Yes I would, they add warmth to the programme. I still miss Betty behind the bar. Her interactions with the rest of the street was great.
Comments
I didn't say that Heritage means nothing, I simply said that characters only being on the show for heritage reasons is silly.
Also I never said that you would get rid of all characters over 50 either, hence why I never mentioned Audrey, Dev, Norris, Sylvia, Roy etc or even said anything remotely like replacing them with young teenagers. I think you are just making things up to suit your arguement.
As an example I don't see many people moaning nowadays that Carla runs the factory instead of Mike Baldwin, in fact she is one of the more popular characters.
Corrie can't carry on living in the 1960's forever. People's tastes change and people move on, it's about time that Corrie was modernised for the current market without losing it's charm.
Ageist nonsense. They provide warmth, depth and continuinty to the programme. The reason why EastEnders is on a decline at the momment is because it has lost the long standing stalwarts that are recogniseable to die hard fans. But also recogniseable to people that dip in and out.
I have always watched Corrie but used to dip in and out of EE. I don't anymore because in the last 3 years it has lost to many characters that were EE in my opinion. For example Pat, Pauline and Peggy.
I would hardly say it is living in the 1960's. Its problem recently is that it has tried to be modern and politically correct with the inclusion of more LGBT characters. However this failed because at one point the programme was turning into Queer as Folk.
Ask most younger people who their favourite characters are in Corrie. Its not Jason, Gary or Sophie. They usually say Audrey, Deidre, Roy, Hayley, Norris and Sylvia. Why? because they add humour and warmth. They are also characters that are their parents/ grandparents favourites.
I think you're missing my point.
Out of the younger characters, only David and Kylie are any good, but that is down to the shoddy writing and casting.
You've basically agreed with me regarding older characters, as I mentioned the names above as good characters. You however left out Emily, Dennis, Rita etc who I said have no place on the show anymore and are only here for heritage reasons.
I wouldn't say to get rid of them all straight away, but to phase them out over the next few years. They are easily replaceable.
Would you honestly miss Emily who's barely on the show anymore? would you miss Dennis who was brought back as a plot device? would you miss Rita who pretends she still owns Norris' shop?
Great post, couldn't agree more.
Sean - Camp but not funny
Paul - Small and boring
Carla - Stories all the same, steals someone's man who then gets killed
Rob - Out of prison and running a factory?!!
Sunita - Personality transplant and now unlikeable
Michelle - Former barmaid running a factory?!! plus she thinks she is God's gift to man
Ryan - New personality to go with new head
Tina - Younger version of Michelle
Tommy - Henpecked
Audrey - Too long in the tooth ( literally) to get so many boyfriends. As if Nigel Havers would look twice at her!!!
Oh lovieeeee.
Rita and Norris relationship seems to have been replaced with Norris and Mary which is awful. Mary is one note character, with no depth, emotion and is just a panto idiot. Rita and Norris was an award winning duo.
Barbara Knox is also the best actress in the show, she can turn on the emotion in the blink of an eye. I love Rita's relationship with Tina, it's one of the only good qualities about Tina these days. I do miss Rita and Sally however.
Deirdre Barlow
Sunita
Emily Bishop and Dennis to be crushed under a box of stamps.....
Scary Mary
Fiz and Chesney - to be done in by Kirsty (and then she tops herself)
Shaun Tully - you're gay. We get it already.
Izzy & Gary
Gail and Audrey
Tommy (total waste of the gorgeous Tina)
Mandy (As if Lloyd would fancy her after when his ideal looking woman was Cheryl)
Beth and her son
Rob
Dennis - Homeless and living rough for years, Sophie randomly starts working in a soup kitchen and just so happens to bring him back to the street he once lived in, Rita spots him, he then meets up with his old chums, Eileen and Julie find out that he's a long lost cousin, never mentioned again, him and Rita grow close within a matter of weeks and get married, since then they stand in Norris' shop all day and by night have a quiet drink in the Rovers, unless Mary has another plot device storyline.
Absolutely contrived and thrilling stuff. He's a pointless plot device who was brought back for heritage reasons so they could say they have one of the first characters still on the show. Does he have a purpose..no, is he needed...no, could another character do his storylines...absolutely.
Katie
Izzy
Rob
Sean
Ryan
Tracey
Axe
Yes I would, they add warmth to the programme. I still miss Betty behind the bar. Her interactions with the rest of the street was great.
No! No! No! No! No!:eek: