I'm not saying that there still aren't things to be critical of EastEnders about, but Kevin O'Sullivan really is a poor reviewer!
'It's only loser Lucy'', he says. Yes, Lucy's not one of life's great winners. But then she is only 20 years old - not many people are winners at that age. And I don't know why I'm so surprise that O'Sullivan seems to be completely oblivious to the fact Lucy is the daughter of Ian Beale; one of the last remaining original EE characters (and the importance of this). She is a member of EastEnders original first family - and thereby a legacy character. She is a character who was born on the show and will die on the show, and whose death will affect an entire community. But of course, it doesn't fit O'Sullivan's narrative to include all of that in his piece.
It's interesting O'Sullivan doesn't bother to tell us why he thinks Tina's death will be so great. Tina has no family connections in Corrie and it appears the Corrie TPTB have butchered her character in the build up to her death to make a whodunnit viable. One of the biggest nonono's in television is to try and make a character fit a storyline rather than shaping a storyline around a character. Lucy's suffered from a lack of development over the years, but that ambiguity over a character has allowed TPTB to fill in the holes about her personality in death. By contrast Tina seems to have had far more of a defined characterisation than Lucy ever did.
I also don't know why he invokes Who Shot Phil, and Who Killed Archie into his piece - both of those storylines were pretty successful and caught the public's attention - EE's trough started in February 2010, not spring 2001. The fact he mentions those storylines along with his 'depressing dystopia' meme suggests that he's someone who simply doesn't like EE no matter what. And that's fine. But it appears he's letting that dislike effect any objective judgement he may have as a critic.
His attempts at using hyperbole effectively are also pretty sh*te. The Carter kids are ''all about 40''....really? It's not unreasonable that Mick and Linda would have children young - Tanya and Max had Lauren and Abi at pretty young ages - Tanya was 19 and 21 respectively when she had her daughters. In any case, the fact that's the only thing he can criticise the Carters for says everything about how fantastic the family have been in the last few months.
Personally I think that while Lucy was an interesting character choice as she had a lot of links to the square there isn't enough audience emotional involvement to really push the storyline, maybe I'm wrong about this and maybe it's just in here, another character might have been a better choice someone that the audience really cares about, furthermore, because of this waiting until 2015 is a long time for this story to be done when we as soaps fans are a bit notorious for screaming "when will it end?" when we begin to get bored of a story. The two points he has made are interlinked, imo.
JoP, if Sullivan had summed it up in the way you have then I'd have thought 'ok, fair enough' because they are valid points. However, the guy just seems interested in attacking Eastenders however he can, so I can't take him seriously when it looks like he's obe of those people who can't just enjoy their soaps without attacking the rivals.
Personally I think that while Lucy was an interesting character choice as she had a lot of links to the square there isn't enough audience emotional involvement to really push the storyline, maybe I'm wrong about this and maybe it's just in here, another character might have been a better choice someone that the audience really cares about, furthermore, because of this waiting until 2015 is a long time for this story to be done when we as soaps fans are a bit notorious for screaming "when will it end?" when we begin to get bored of a story. The two points he has made are interlinked, imo.
I totally agree with you that there might not be much emotional investment in Lucy but I don't think that has anything to do with the fact that her face has changed a couple of times over the years which he seemed to think was a major point. The reason there is no emotional investment is because Lucy just has not been developed ever since Hetti has taken over the role, she was largely ignored by Newman or else given crappy stories with bad characters like Joey and Derek Branning that just were not thought through.
If the past 2 or 3 weeks are anything to go by, Lucy could have been an incredibly popular character but she was not given anything decent regretfully. I really think that has more to do with the state of the show the past few years rather than the character.
I also think the story is going to be a lot about her surrounding family and how it affects them as well. DTC has highlight that grief will be a major theme immediately following her death so even if you don't feel sorry for Lucy being dead, you are definitely going to feel that Ian lost a daughter or than Peter lost his twin.
For your second point, I thing that is pretty subjective. It's true that some fans are impatient but it is equally true that some fans love that bigger stories might take a while. I for one couldn't be happier that this story is taking a long time, maybe 10 months is a bit much but I am glad the mystery isn't going to be solved in a matter of weeks. I also think that the more impatient fans are definitely more vocal about their thoughts than the people who don't mind or even like longer stories.
We all know he'll be glued to his tv come February I really liked Hetti's version, so I do care that she has gone because there was so much potential there and I'm sad she only got to show near the end of her time on EE.
Lucy has more history on the square than Tina McIntyre has on Corrie. Lucy has her present family and all the people who knew her parents, grandparents and Lou Beale. Who has Tina got? Tina's murder is only based around her being one of their big stars.
I don't see why Lucy is a loser either. Compare her to others on Corrie of a similar age and we have immature crap like Sophie Webster.
I was always a firm Corrie fan but they need to put effort in to their charactes and SLs.
EE is planned much better than Corrie. The Lucy SL will be superior to the Tina SL.
He got this right "the finger was pointed at the usual suspects with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer."
This - he did make a good point there - but then again, that is the nature of a whodunit, especially in soaps.
Can't stand the guy really - he is funny to read and watch though - the article is both hilarious and ridiculous at the same time. He's clearly not an EE fan - that much is obvious.
I can read it, disagree with what he says because it's so one-dimensional and just now take him less seriously than I did before (which wasn't a lot, really).
the BBC has kindly consented to unmask the real culprit in – wait for it – February, 2015. Like anyone’s still gonna give a toss by then.
Agreed. It's ridiculous that we're being made to wait so long. Who cares about the 30th? I'd rather a fantastic storyline playing out naturally than purposefully stretching it out for the 30th anniversary. After what DTC did with the Danielle/Ronnie storyline, I won't be investing my time into this storyline. Nine months of waiting just so Danielle could die? Never have I been more pissed off at a storyline in any soap. No doubt this storyline will be just as disappointing.
get ready to be lost in apathy over the fate of Lucy, the sudden sex maniac with a sudden coke habit.
Sudden is an understatement. It's a complete farce.
JoP, if Sullivan had summed it up in the way you have then I'd have thought 'ok, fair enough' because they are valid points. However, the guy just seems interested in attacking Eastenders however he can, so I can't take him seriously when it looks like he's obe of those people who can't just enjoy their soaps without attacking the rivals.
I totally agree with you that there might not be much emotional investment in Lucy but I don't think that has anything to do with the fact that her face has changed a couple of times over the years which he seemed to think was a major point. The reason there is no emotional investment is because Lucy just has not been developed ever since Hetti has taken over the role, she was largely ignored by Newman or else given crappy stories with bad characters like Joey and Derek Branning that just were not thought through.
If the past 2 or 3 weeks are anything to go by, Lucy could have been an incredibly popular character but she was not given anything decent regretfully. I really think that has more to do with the state of the show the past few years rather than the character.
I also think the story is going to be a lot about her surrounding family and how it affects them as well. DTC has highlight that grief will be a major theme immediately following her death so even if you don't feel sorry for Lucy being dead, you are definitely going to feel that Ian lost a daughter or than Peter lost his twin.
For your second point, I thing that is pretty subjective. It's true that some fans are impatient but it is equally true that some fans love that bigger stories might take a while. I for one couldn't be happier that this story is taking a long time, maybe 10 months is a bit much but I am glad the mystery isn't going to be solved in a matter of weeks. I also think that the more impatient fans are definitely more vocal about their thoughts than the people who don't mind or even like longer stories.
I do agree with your points especially the last one, some stories do demand a two year story arc, in fact I think many soap storylines now a days don't go on for long enough. The example I always use with a long story arc that was successful, imo, was the Trevor & Little Mo plot which ran for 2 years but demanded to be that long to really work effectively. I'm just not sure a whodunnit will really work for this length of time without become a bit stale as the T&LM plot was an issue led one but I could be wrong - it happens. I also think it's rather unfair for some fans to discredit Tina's story because she doesn't have the family links that Lucy has, sure it will help watching the grieve of a well established character whom we have seen grow up and make the story multi-layered but Tina does have links and has very much built up an urban family and imo aspects of Tina's ending seem all the more tragic than Lucy's. Well see but like I said I think, for now and not having the gift of hindsight which we'll all in a couple of months, he has got some of my own feelings about the storyline spot on.
I agree with him on a few things. Mainly, I wasn't a fan of her "sudden cocaine addiction" seemingly thrown in for no reason the week she died. Also - and I'm expecting to be called to defend this opinion - but I agree that I don't think she was a character that had the prescence to keep this whodunit interesting from now till February 2015; and the suspects aren't much better in that regard.
Oh and yes Tina's death will be better as am popping open the champagne that night, and what isn't better when you're pissed?
I agree with him on a few things. Mainly, I wasn't a fan of her "sudden cocaine addiction" seemingly thrown in for no reason the week she died. Also - and I'm expecting to be called to defend this opinion - but I agree that I don't think she was a character that had the prescence to keep this whodunit interesting from now till February 2015; and the suspects aren't much better in that regard.
Oh and yes Tina's death will be better as am popping open the champagne that night, and what isn't better when you're pissed?
I think DTC had to work quickly to get a big storyline going so he had to get the ball rolling. One thing he did say is that we will be learning a lot of things about Lucy throughout the storyline that will probably keep the story flowing and interesting to the viewer but since I have nothing to back that notion up with, I agree that Lucy isn't a character that people would particularly care about losing.
There are so many things we don't know at the minute, who is sending the pictures to Max? Where did she get the Cocaine from? How long has she been taking drugs? What caused her death and how the hell did she actually die?
I don't think this will be a typical WhoDunnit in that someone gets murdered just after pissing a lot of people off and being generally be hated (like what happened with Archie). DTC has said he won't be recreating the best hits and I believe he knows what he is doing. We will just have to wait and see I guess.
To be fair, having not watched a whole episode since Dereks death 2 Christmasses back, I did watch Fridays episode, hoping it would be as exciting as anticipated. Although I was disappointed with it...and how Lucy was suddenly a sex mad druggie (I kept up reading spoilers) I truly thought the audience share would have been bigger. As for Kevin O'Sullivan, he's always moaning about one of the soaps, and seems to pick on EE more than others....but who believe critics anyway? No critic has ever influenced what I watch.
Aren't Corrie keeping Tina's killer reveal until Christmas? if that's the case his attack on EE over that while directing praise at Corrie seems a little odd to say the least.
Who will mourn Tina after she has gone? at least Lucy has a family who are going to have to deal with her murder. Like real victims do. As DTC said himself. Its rooted in realism. Maybe the truth is that Kevin O Sullivan just hasn't got the attention span to see this.
i am wondering how much money is he getting off corrie for saying that?
The only time I remember him praising EE is when he said the Carters were the best thing to ever happen to the show. This was on The Wright Stuff. He seems to have backtracked on that now though.
Kevin even managed to find fault with that beautiful Nana Moon episode set in Normandy. For an entire decade all he has done every Sunday is state the show. :kitty:
The only time I remember him praising EE is when he said the Carters were the best thing to ever happen to the show. This was on The Wright Stuff. He seems to have backtracked on that now though.
Kevin even managed to find fault with that beautiful Nana Moon episode set in Normandy. For an entire decade all he has done every Sunday is state the show. :kitty:
I think myself and Kevin might be soul mates as I never liked that episode either, well not as much as everyone else seems to enjoy it, but then again I'm really biased to anything Alfie centric.
I think myself and Kevin might be soul mates as I never liked that episode either, well not as much as everyone else seems to enjoy it, but then again I'm really biased to anything Alfie centric.
Gary Bushell used to be similar he made a really insensitive comment on the September 11th Anniversary one year where he stated suicide bombers should be sent into Walford I remember loads of people complaining he had gone too far. Don't know if it was coincidence but he stopped writing for NOTW shortly after.
Comments
'It's only loser Lucy'', he says. Yes, Lucy's not one of life's great winners. But then she is only 20 years old - not many people are winners at that age. And I don't know why I'm so surprise that O'Sullivan seems to be completely oblivious to the fact Lucy is the daughter of Ian Beale; one of the last remaining original EE characters (and the importance of this). She is a member of EastEnders original first family - and thereby a legacy character. She is a character who was born on the show and will die on the show, and whose death will affect an entire community. But of course, it doesn't fit O'Sullivan's narrative to include all of that in his piece.
It's interesting O'Sullivan doesn't bother to tell us why he thinks Tina's death will be so great. Tina has no family connections in Corrie and it appears the Corrie TPTB have butchered her character in the build up to her death to make a whodunnit viable. One of the biggest nonono's in television is to try and make a character fit a storyline rather than shaping a storyline around a character. Lucy's suffered from a lack of development over the years, but that ambiguity over a character has allowed TPTB to fill in the holes about her personality in death. By contrast Tina seems to have had far more of a defined characterisation than Lucy ever did.
I also don't know why he invokes Who Shot Phil, and Who Killed Archie into his piece - both of those storylines were pretty successful and caught the public's attention - EE's trough started in February 2010, not spring 2001. The fact he mentions those storylines along with his 'depressing dystopia' meme suggests that he's someone who simply doesn't like EE no matter what. And that's fine. But it appears he's letting that dislike effect any objective judgement he may have as a critic.
His attempts at using hyperbole effectively are also pretty sh*te. The Carter kids are ''all about 40''....really? It's not unreasonable that Mick and Linda would have children young - Tanya and Max had Lauren and Abi at pretty young ages - Tanya was 19 and 21 respectively when she had her daughters. In any case, the fact that's the only thing he can criticise the Carters for says everything about how fantastic the family have been in the last few months.
JoP, if Sullivan had summed it up in the way you have then I'd have thought 'ok, fair enough' because they are valid points.
I totally agree with you that there might not be much emotional investment in Lucy but I don't think that has anything to do with the fact that her face has changed a couple of times over the years which he seemed to think was a major point. The reason there is no emotional investment is because Lucy just has not been developed ever since Hetti has taken over the role, she was largely ignored by Newman or else given crappy stories with bad characters like Joey and Derek Branning that just were not thought through.
If the past 2 or 3 weeks are anything to go by, Lucy could have been an incredibly popular character but she was not given anything decent regretfully. I really think that has more to do with the state of the show the past few years rather than the character.
I also think the story is going to be a lot about her surrounding family and how it affects them as well. DTC has highlight that grief will be a major theme immediately following her death so even if you don't feel sorry for Lucy being dead, you are definitely going to feel that Ian lost a daughter or than Peter lost his twin.
For your second point, I thing that is pretty subjective. It's true that some fans are impatient but it is equally true that some fans love that bigger stories might take a while. I for one couldn't be happier that this story is taking a long time, maybe 10 months is a bit much but I am glad the mystery isn't going to be solved in a matter of weeks. I also think that the more impatient fans are definitely more vocal about their thoughts than the people who don't mind or even like longer stories.
I don't see why Lucy is a loser either. Compare her to others on Corrie of a similar age and we have immature crap like Sophie Webster.
I was always a firm Corrie fan but they need to put effort in to their charactes and SLs.
EE is planned much better than Corrie. The Lucy SL will be superior to the Tina SL.
Lol he thinks Tina's death will put Lucy's to shame?
Obviously a one minded Corrie fan that hates the fact EastEnders is better quality.
This - he did make a good point there - but then again, that is the nature of a whodunit, especially in soaps.
Can't stand the guy really - he is funny to read and watch though - the article is both hilarious and ridiculous at the same time. He's clearly not an EE fan - that much is obvious.
I can read it, disagree with what he says because it's so one-dimensional and just now take him less seriously than I did before (which wasn't a lot, really).
Gutter press at work, TBH, imo
Agreed. It's ridiculous that we're being made to wait so long. Who cares about the 30th? I'd rather a fantastic storyline playing out naturally than purposefully stretching it out for the 30th anniversary. After what DTC did with the Danielle/Ronnie storyline, I won't be investing my time into this storyline. Nine months of waiting just so Danielle could die? Never have I been more pissed off at a storyline in any soap. No doubt this storyline will be just as disappointing.
Sudden is an understatement. It's a complete farce.
Isn't that the point though? We're not supposed to understand everything behind Lucy's death yet. It's to come out in future months.
Thanks mate
I do agree with your points especially the last one, some stories do demand a two year story arc, in fact I think many soap storylines now a days don't go on for long enough. The example I always use with a long story arc that was successful, imo, was the Trevor & Little Mo plot which ran for 2 years but demanded to be that long to really work effectively. I'm just not sure a whodunnit will really work for this length of time without become a bit stale as the T&LM plot was an issue led one but I could be wrong - it happens. I also think it's rather unfair for some fans to discredit Tina's story because she doesn't have the family links that Lucy has, sure it will help watching the grieve of a well established character whom we have seen grow up and make the story multi-layered but Tina does have links and has very much built up an urban family and imo aspects of Tina's ending seem all the more tragic than Lucy's. Well see but like I said I think, for now and not having the gift of hindsight which we'll all in a couple of months, he has got some of my own feelings about the storyline spot on.
Oh and yes Tina's death will be better as am popping open the champagne that night, and what isn't better when you're pissed?
I think DTC had to work quickly to get a big storyline going so he had to get the ball rolling. One thing he did say is that we will be learning a lot of things about Lucy throughout the storyline that will probably keep the story flowing and interesting to the viewer but since I have nothing to back that notion up with, I agree that Lucy isn't a character that people would particularly care about losing.
There are so many things we don't know at the minute, who is sending the pictures to Max? Where did she get the Cocaine from? How long has she been taking drugs? What caused her death and how the hell did she actually die?
I don't think this will be a typical WhoDunnit in that someone gets murdered just after pissing a lot of people off and being generally be hated (like what happened with Archie). DTC has said he won't be recreating the best hits and I believe he knows what he is doing. We will just have to wait and see I guess.
Who will mourn Tina after she has gone? at least Lucy has a family who are going to have to deal with her murder. Like real victims do. As DTC said himself. Its rooted in realism. Maybe the truth is that Kevin O Sullivan just hasn't got the attention span to see this.
The only time I remember him praising EE is when he said the Carters were the best thing to ever happen to the show. This was on The Wright Stuff. He seems to have backtracked on that now though.
Kevin even managed to find fault with that beautiful Nana Moon episode set in Normandy. For an entire decade all he has done every Sunday is state the show. :kitty:
I think myself and Kevin might be soul mates as I never liked that episode either, well not as much as everyone else seems to enjoy it, but then again I'm really biased to anything Alfie centric.
It was Hilda Braid he called void of emotion.
Totally unfair and absolutely uncalled for imho.
Ouch.
Gary Bushell used to be similar he made a really insensitive comment on the September 11th Anniversary one year where he stated suicide bombers should be sent into Walford