I am giving the writers a bit of leeway, they havent suddenly turned Jack into a sex mad murderer.
I am sure that back in 2000, Jack and Robert were not on screen 24/7, so I will give them the benefit of the doubt that it could have happen.
You might be willing to but accept that others may not.
Soaps are about significant moments in these character's lives. This is a pretty significant moment for both characters for it to have happened off screen and some people are not happy about the implication of that.
What secrets does Diane have in her closet? Is Vals skin hanging in there, which she used to play a ghost when Eric was grieving?
You might be willing to but accept that others may not.
Soaps are about significant moments in these character's lives. This is a pretty significant moment for both characters for it to have happened off screen and some people are not happy about the implication of that.
What secrets does Diane have in her closet? Is Vals skin hanging in there, which she used to play a ghost when Eric was grieving?
Indeed
By that logic there's no point of the last 40 plus years of Emmerdale if past characters and events can be changed at a whim
There is nothing worse than plot driven rather than character driven drama imo. Past events have been changed to suit the unbearable robron plot
By that logic there's no point of the last 40 plus years of Emmerdale if past characters and events can be changed at a whim
There is nothing worse than plot driven rather than character driven drama imo. Past events have been changed to suit the unbeatable robron plot
Exactly.
Will we find out that someone had a weather machine and created the storm that killed Tricia? Will Marlon have his revenge?
The soap is struggling right now to create believable long term characters to be sure. It's why it's been quite hard to watch for me the past year or so.
I thought it was amazing. Soaps are entertainment. I don't recall it every being said that they had to be an exact mirror of real life. Just relax and enjoy it and stop looking to moan
You might be willing to but accept that others may not.
Soaps are about significant moments in these character's lives. This is a pretty significant moment for both characters for it to have happened off screen and some people are not happy about the implication of that.
What secrets does Diane have in her closet? Is Vals skin hanging in there, which she used to play a ghost when Eric was grieving?
Talk about dramatic!!
Implication of what, that a older farmer might have have found it hard to accept that his first born son was gay and gave him a hiding once and then never talked about it again.
Sorry but I can see Jack doing exactly this.
Now if they had suddenly turned into a mass serial killer with bodies buired all over Emmerdale then yes I would be in agreement with you, but they didnt .
Implication of what, that a older farmer might have have found it hard to accept that his first born son was gay and gave him a hiding once and then never talked about it again.
Sorry but I can see Jack doing exactly this.
Now if they had suddenly turned into a mass serial killer with bodies buired all over Emmerdale then yes I would be in agreement with you, but they didnt .
So basically Robert slept with his brothers wife to cover his true sexuality?
Implication of what, that a older farmer might have have found it hard to accept that his first born son was gay and gave him a hiding once and then never talked about it again.
Sorry but I can see Jack doing exactly this.
Now if they had suddenly turned into a mass serial killer with bodies buired all over Emmerdale then yes I would be in agreement with you, but they didnt .
The implication that any characters past can be changed at any time to suit whatever plot is relevant right now.
As usual you're completely missing the point. Remove my exaggerated plot line about Diane and the point still stands.
I don't see it as being that unrealistic, surely it can and has happened in real life that a tradgedy has happened and it has effected local people. Just thinking back to the airshow crash in Shoreham for instance, the Emmerdale scene was pretty similar to that terrible tradgedy and I believe most of the victims were all pretty much local to within a small area. I remember well the scenes on the news and my builders son was caught up on the periphery and said it was a very surreal experience with people wandering around.
I didn't enjoy the run up episodes to last night but I thought that they pulled it all together very very well and the scenes were epic.
I thought it was amazing. Soaps are entertainment. I don't recall it every being said that they had to be an exact mirror of real life. Just relax and enjoy it and stop looking to moan
I would prefer to commend emmerdale for trying something different. It was put together really well. I think had James's death not been leaked then it would have been even better.
What's unrealistic is soap viewers and especially old hand soap viewers on here expecting realism. It's a soap and a highly entertaining one at the moment :kitty:
You're totally ignoring what the poster said though.
Both characters were on-screen back then, and none of this happened. The farmhand mentioned in Robert's story did not exist.
Nobody has a problem with what Jack may have done on the chance this story was real, but since both characters were on screen at this time and it didn't happen, it didn't happen.
It's the same as people getting annoyed at Ross/Charity making a baby off screen, but on a larger scale.
What are you talking about?!!!! We don't view these characters 24/7 so things might have happened off screen. Just because we didn't see it in the soap at the time doesn't mean that it could never have happened.
I thought it was amazing. Soaps are entertainment. I don't recall it every being said that they had to be an exact mirror of real life. Just relax and enjoy it and stop looking to moan
That's the way I feel too. I stopped watching Corrie, EE and H&A because they stopped entertaining me. If ED ever stops entertaining me then I'll stop watching it. In the meantime I'll carry on enjoying bonkers Emma and the rest of them
What are you talking about?!!!! We don't view these characters 24/7 so things might have happened off screen. Just because we didn't see it in the soap at the time doesn't mean that it could never have happened.
But that's the whole point of dramatisation. When we tell stories in our day to day lives, we put together important events into a coherent narrative, and leave out the mundane ones. I don't think anyone would have a problem if they left out a scene of Jack going to the toilet in 2002, which was only brought up now. It's mundane, and we can probably assume that it happened. But as others have said, the whole hitting thing would have been a big part of the characters' story, and therefore would have been shown, so to bring it up now out of the blue is just bad writing.
Comments
You might be willing to but accept that others may not.
Soaps are about significant moments in these character's lives. This is a pretty significant moment for both characters for it to have happened off screen and some people are not happy about the implication of that.
What secrets does Diane have in her closet? Is Vals skin hanging in there, which she used to play a ghost when Eric was grieving?
Indeed
By that logic there's no point of the last 40 plus years of Emmerdale if past characters and events can be changed at a whim
There is nothing worse than plot driven rather than character driven drama imo. Past events have been changed to suit the unbearable robron plot
Yep. The entire time I was thinking "pile up, pile up, pile up".
Exactly.
Will we find out that someone had a weather machine and created the storm that killed Tricia? Will Marlon have his revenge?
The soap is struggling right now to create believable long term characters to be sure. It's why it's been quite hard to watch for me the past year or so.
Talk about dramatic!!
Implication of what, that a older farmer might have have found it hard to accept that his first born son was gay and gave him a hiding once and then never talked about it again.
Sorry but I can see Jack doing exactly this.
Now if they had suddenly turned into a mass serial killer with bodies buired all over Emmerdale then yes I would be in agreement with you, but they didnt .
So basically Robert slept with his brothers wife to cover his true sexuality?
OK then
The implication that any characters past can be changed at any time to suit whatever plot is relevant right now.
As usual you're completely missing the point. Remove my exaggerated plot line about Diane and the point still stands.
Whatever to tell you the truth I am passed caring.
I never really liked Jack that much anyway. Always thought he was a goody two shoes who thought he was better that everyone.
with james walking out the shower?...
Erm, I'd rather not.
I didn't enjoy the run up episodes to last night but I thought that they pulled it all together very very well and the scenes were epic.
I too never liked the Jack character...too hide bound for me.
Bill Ward looked fantastic on this morning
He's gorgeous
Little secret: I fancied him something chronic when he first started on ED.
Then I realised James was a colossal nob and went off him a bit. ;-)
I agree - it was one reason James was one of my favourite characters :-) I liked him regardless of that though.
No Robert wanted anything that Andy had as he was always jealous of Andy,
Well said.
What are you talking about?!!!! We don't view these characters 24/7 so things might have happened off screen. Just because we didn't see it in the soap at the time doesn't mean that it could never have happened.
But Robert's bisexual so why wouldn't he sleep with Katie???
Serious question - what does this mean? (I've never heard it before)
That's the way I feel too. I stopped watching Corrie, EE and H&A because they stopped entertaining me. If ED ever stops entertaining me then I'll stop watching it. In the meantime I'll carry on enjoying bonkers Emma and the rest of them
But that's the whole point of dramatisation. When we tell stories in our day to day lives, we put together important events into a coherent narrative, and leave out the mundane ones. I don't think anyone would have a problem if they left out a scene of Jack going to the toilet in 2002, which was only brought up now. It's mundane, and we can probably assume that it happened. But as others have said, the whole hitting thing would have been a big part of the characters' story, and therefore would have been shown, so to bring it up now out of the blue is just bad writing.