This Cot Death storyline in Eastenders

12357

Comments

  • Charlie ChuckCharlie Chuck Posts: 2,428
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Dynasty was a fantasy world of rich people, they still had affairs and misery.
    Footballers wives killed a baby.

    Tanya's baby died. But she put false tan on Amber's baby and pretended it was hers (Amber being of South Asian origin).

    Tanya wasn't racist, she was driven by greed.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,187
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tanya's baby died. But she put false tan on Amber's baby and pretended it was hers (Amber being of South Asian origin).

    Tanya wasn't racist, she was driven by greed.
    The baby was smothered by a dog!
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footballers_Wives read it, you have rose tinted glasses on, rape, death, mental illness.
    It had the lot.
  • HarloweHarlowe Posts: 20,003
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If you don't agree with the storyline as other said your not force to watch simply change the channel or switch off, there is too much moaning of late about EE nobody on this forum seems to be happy about anything the show does, it makes me wonder if they are truly fans or just making a fuss for the sake of it because they can't stand the show.

    Of course the storyline is unrealistic and out of the realms of belief that is surely the point of the show, do I agree with the swap element of the storyline no I think its pointless but I don't constantly make negatives posts about it before its even aired, people need to realize this plot is happening no amount of saying how low EE has sunk or how terrible its become will absolutely make no difference to the outcome of this plot, so turn off if you don't like your not made to watch anything it called freewill.
  • Charlie ChuckCharlie Chuck Posts: 2,428
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Harlowe wrote: »
    If you don't agree with the storyline as other said your not force to watch simply change the channel or switch off, there is too much moaning of late about EE nobody on this forum seems to be happy about anything the show does, it makes me wonder if they are truly fans or just making a fuss for the sake of it because they can't stand the show.

    Of course the storyline is unrealistic and out of the realms of belief that is surely the point of the show, do I agree with the swap element of the storyline no I think its pointless but I don't constantly make negatives posts about it before its even aired, people need to realize this plot is happening no amount of saying how low EE has sunk or how terrible its become will absolutely make no difference to the outcome of this plot, so turn off if you don't like your not made to watch anything it called freewill.

    It started off as a debate: Should EE do this. Rather than should you watch it. I joined stating they shouldn't do it.

    Nothing at all with 'if you don't like it switch off' that wasn't the question.
  • chloebchloeb Posts: 6,501
    Forum Member
    Ahh I've been avoiding this thread as I don't like spoilers.

    Going from that post, I expect the EE usual, it'll start well, some good acting, then they'll ramp things up with the Baby snatch storyline and ruin their previous good work IMO.

    Usual EE stuff.

    I'm one of those people who doesn't take well to this 'dealing with issues' guff as if it's a public service.
    It's a bums on seats operation, they need to be a little more careful with some storylines so they don't get it in the neck from the Tabloids for being exploitative.


    I do remember the Sue/Ali SIDS storyline bought it to the publics attention...which was a good thing.
    Like you say the SL in itself is OK its the swap thing that just sensationalises it, its a tragic enough situation in itself without over doing it.

    By the way...does anyone know how long the swap is for...do Alfie & Kat realise that Ronnies walking around with their baby at some point?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,259
    Forum Member
    pjw1985 wrote: »
    How often does a cot death happen and the mother swaps the dead baby with someone elses baby? Sorry, i agree with the OP, the storyline is sick

    It's not 'sick', she's hardly taking the baby and murdering it is she. I think it's pretty heartbreaking that having already lost a child previously, she feels this is her only option. That is what EE are getting at.
  • HarloweHarlowe Posts: 20,003
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It started off as a debate: Should EE do this. Rather than should you watch it. I joined stating they shouldn't do it.

    Nothing at all with 'if you don't like it switch off' that wasn't the question.

    I can't answer that question constructively until I've seen the episodes myself and to be honest I do think anyone can until they've watch it.

    When viewers watch shows like EE they know what they are letting themselves in for it hardly known for being all sunshine and roses, I know it will hit close at home for some people but this is the thing, there has been much worse on the show and once this storyline has past there will be again.

    Its how the show has survived in such a competitive market, its the reason people watch, if they didn't do out of this world hard hitting and gritty plots and that will no doubt leave people uncomfortable at time, it would be cancelled before you know because the BBC has to justify the budget its given, you need to be realistic when watching show like EE they ain't always gonna be how you want them to be.
  • CrazyeyeskillerCrazyeyeskiller Posts: 4,869
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    My cousin's three month old boy died suddenly on Christmas Day morning 8 years ago. How very thoughtless of him to time it so inconveniently and how terribly inconsiderate of her to be crying and wailing when everyone was supposed to be having a good time :rolleyes:

    I'm sorry for your loss.

    You have missed my point by a country mile though.
  • CrazyeyeskillerCrazyeyeskiller Posts: 4,869
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    dan2008 wrote: »
    This is just so old:yawn:
    Just Lately there's been a lot of light hearted moments in almost every episode and a Happy ending for Stacey on xmas day.

    This storyline has already been praised by the press which is quite unusual as they usually rip EastEnders apart.

    In the Daily Mirror last week a women who the BBC had been working with was in this same position and she had praised the storyline highly

    The OP has a thing against EastEnders which is clear (see their Past Threads) and i know it's not to everyones taste but to make threads like this based on a storyline that hasn't even aired yet is quite frankly SAD and i just which people would get out more and try to understand thatr EastEnders is a soap,a drama and it's not real

    I don't have a problem with Eastenders or this storyline. ADULTS can do what they like , I have no issue with the problem being on a loop AFTER 9pm forever - However it's disgusting to have it blaring out it's negativity four nights a week into the homes around Britian and the impressionable minds that are exposed to it.

    It is so sad and bad its untrue though :D
  • CrazyeyeskillerCrazyeyeskiller Posts: 4,869
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It is disturbing that storytellers for a soap opera, a supposed bit of entertainment, are going out of their way to act out misery, a misery that is REAL for many people.

    It is so strange how people derive enjoyment from watching abject misery isn't it?! :confused:

    But again if people do then they do , i just wish they would move it to a more suitable channel and timeslot.
  • CrazyeyeskillerCrazyeyeskiller Posts: 4,869
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    EuroChris wrote: »
    All you're doing is unfairly singling out EE. All of the soaps do this;

    Emmerdale: drug addiction and prostitution, gay self loathing, attempted suicide, unborn baby that will have downs syndrome
    Corrie: tram crash that has devastated the street with people killed, two multiple killers living on the street in the same year, alcoholism
    Hollyoaks: Character murdered after arranging to meet someone online.[/QUOTE

    I don't mean to single Eastenders out, you are right, they are all culpable - EE just screams the loudest at me through the week and on a Sunday, followed closely by the woeful Hollyoaks (realistic Hollyoaks :D)
  • HarloweHarlowe Posts: 20,003
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I don't have a problem with Eastenders or this storyline. ADULTS can do what they like , I have no issue with the problem being on a loop AFTER 9pm forever - However it's disgusting to have it blaring out it's negativity four nights a week into the homes around Britian and the impressionable minds that are exposed to it.

    It is so sad and bad its untrue though :D

    Then its the PARENTS responsibility to control what there kids watch, I was watching much worse on EE at 8 years old and It hasn't made me into a nutter, its the television culture, easier to plonk your child in front of the TV then spend some quality time with them, if children like watching the show and there parents have no problem with it then its there choice, plus your find most children have a TV in there room so its more freely to access.

    how does it affect you exactly? unless your a outraged parent.
  • CrazyeyeskillerCrazyeyeskiller Posts: 4,869
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The fact that this isn't even in the soap section where it should be is enough of an indicator that a whole lot of hate is expected.

    All this thread has done now anyways is draw attention from non-EE viewers who may even tune in now to see what the fuss is all about, thanks for the free publicity.

    As an EE fan I'm used to seeing the soap tackle storylines that may offend some, and others won't like it whatsoever, etc. but that won't stop them.

    Missing the point.
  • CrazyeyeskillerCrazyeyeskiller Posts: 4,869
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    timboy wrote: »
    On Charlie Brooker I presume?

    It was the most unrealistic impersonation of someone on crack I've ever seen but the media is used to push a 'drugs are bad' message and Eastenders were helping pass on the message.

    It wasn't like they showed a load of kids necking eccys and a bit of speed and having a great night.

    It was showing the mess you can get your life into if you take drugs and to help children stay away from drugs. Not all family viewing needs to be everybody laughing and having a great time.



    So it should just be happy tidings all the way? Shit things happen all year round.



    What is stopping you from leaving? :confused:


    I don't even like Eastenders but felt I had to post as you are a whinger of extreme proportions! If you don't want to watch Eastenders turn it over. If you don't want guests in your house to watch it then take the remote and turn it over. If you are at someone elses house and they are watching it and you don't want to watch it then leave. There are loads of way to avoid watching TV programmes that you don't want to watch.

    It's a forum Tim - i'll type what I want when i want.
  • Agent FAgent F Posts: 40,288
    Forum Member
    chloeb wrote: »
    I do remember the Sue/Ali SIDS storyline bought it to the publics attention...which was a good thing.
    Like you say the SL in itself is OK its the swap thing that just sensationalises it, its a tragic enough situation in itself without over doing it.

    By the way...does anyone know how long the swap is for...do Alfie & Kat realise that Ronnies walking around with their baby at some point?

    Assuming this was the "big" storyline Shane Richie was referring to when he was on This Morning (before they announced it) then apparently it'll be going on for quite some time - like a year, maybe even more...
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,910
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    dan2008 wrote: »
    Happy ending for Stacey on xmas day.

    Which she didn't even deserve!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,910
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    sparkle_18 wrote: »
    It's not 'sick', she's hardly taking the baby and murdering it is she. I think it's pretty heartbreaking that having already lost a child previously, she feels this is her only option. That is what EE are getting at.

    oooh no quite true. Rather shes just letting another mum think her baby has died and creating a whole lot of misery, heartbreak and despair for that person. So thats all ok isn't it:) how silly of me for thinking it was 'sick'
  • CrazyeyeskillerCrazyeyeskiller Posts: 4,869
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If you don't want your kids to watch it then don't, the tv has other channels and a off switch for people like you. The rest of us can and will do as we please sans the faux outrage.

    Sans the faux - Why write that? How bizarre :confused:

    And what makes you think it's false outrage? I can assure you it's not.
  • xTonixxTonix Posts: 56,187
    Forum Member
    You would say all that OP, you don't even like EE.
  • CrazyeyeskillerCrazyeyeskiller Posts: 4,869
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    timboy wrote: »
    On Charlie Brooker I presume?

    It was the most unrealistic impersonation of someone on crack I've ever seen but the media is used to push a 'drugs are bad' message and Eastenders were helping pass on the message.

    It wasn't like they showed a load of kids necking eccys and a bit of speed and having a great night.

    It was showing the mess you can get your life into if you take drugs and to help children stay away from drugs. Not all family viewing needs to be everybody laughing and having a great time.



    So it should just be happy tidings all the way? Shit things happen all year round.



    What is stopping you from leaving? :confused:


    I don't even like Eastenders but felt I had to post as you are a whinger of extreme proportions! If you don't want to watch Eastenders turn it over. If you don't want guests in your house to watch it then take the remote and turn it over. If you are at someone elses house and they are watching it and you don't want to watch it then leave. There are loads of way to avoid watching TV programmes that you don't want to watch.

    I love the way you never post in any forum bar sport but have made a special exception for my thread. I can only assume you went back through for a read, thanks for the interest.

    It would be a bit rude of me to turn over or leave the room when all my friends (the women obviously) are watching it. Makes me smile the with all the peole saying just leave the room if it upsets you :) ........can you hear yourselves?? I'm a grown man, a programme on at 7.30 on BBC1 shouldn't "upset" me should it!!? It's a disgrace and it's apologists are no better, any parent who exposes their children to this drivel should ask what possible benefits they derive form it.

    And Timboy, similarly to you telling me not to leave the room or how not to watch a tv programme why don't you take your own advice and not read threads that annoy you and stick to the Scottish Football thread rather than come hunting me down like some sort of DS vigilante. Get back to your litre of Jack Daniels and slating your mums cooking mate.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 122
    Forum Member
    Calm down everyone - it's just a TV show.

    The death of a baby is traumatic at the best of times, (I think Emmerdale handled it beautifully with the death of baby Daniel), but if you consider the characters it involves it makes it all the more tragic.

    Ronnie and Kat have had so many issues with their kids (Danielle, Zoe etc). I feel bad for Ronnie that she cannot catch a break but I hope that EE will tone down the sensationalism and deal with it sensitively.

    What I don't like is how the producers are saying that it's in the public interest to show such stories etc - cut the cr*p - you're doing it for ratings - at least have the guts to admit it.

    As for kids watching the show - soaps have been around long enough for parents to know what they're all about, so if they don't want their kids to watch it then don't let them. I wouldn't allow a 7 year old to watch it.
  • CrazyeyeskillerCrazyeyeskiller Posts: 4,869
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Calm down everyone - it's just a TV show.

    The death of a baby is traumatic at the best of times, (I think Emmerdale handled it beautifully with the death of baby Daniel), but if you consider the characters it involves it makes it all the more tragic.

    Ronnie and Kat have had so many issues with their kids (Danielle, Zoe etc). I feel bad for Ronnie that she cannot catch a break but I hope that EE will tone down the sensationalism and deal with it sensitively.

    What I don't like is how the producers are saying that it's in the public interest to show such stories etc - cut the cr*p - you're doing it for ratings - at least have the guts to admit it.As for kids watching the show - soaps have been around long enough for parents to know what they're all about, so if they don't want their kids to watch it then don't let them. I wouldn't allow a 7 year old to watch it.

    Good post. This could be a good post to end it on cos going round in circles and i'll get banned at this rate for expressing an opinion (i purposely didn't put this in soaps as it's hardly pro EE!!)

    Yes they are doing it for ratings and I will never know how people enjoy watching this acted out badly and in an unrealistic ott way BUT if they do they do.

    It should be on after 9pm though, crack addiction and downfall at 7.30 is just laughable it really is, how can anyone defend this!!! And whilst the above poster may stop a 7 yr old watching it (quite rightly) the majority won't , and that's the tragedy :mad:
  • HarloweHarlowe Posts: 20,003
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Good post. This could be a good post to end it on cos going round in circles and i'll get banned at this rate for expressing an opinion (i purposely didn't put this in soaps as it's hardly pro EE!!)

    Yes they are doing it for ratings and I will never know how people enjoy watching this acted out badly and in an unrealistic ott way BUT if they do they do.

    It should be on after 9pm though, crack addiction and downfall at 7.30 is just laughable it really is, how can anyone defend this!!! And whilst the above poster may stop a 7 yr old watching it (quite rightly) the majority won't , and that's the tragedy :mad:

    Do you have children? you seem almighty interested in the welfare of the young viewing public.

    Because it only in your opinion that its all what you've written above, where is your prove to back up your posts about what psychological effect you seem to think this will do to a child, people have a choice to watch what ever they choose you keep calling people out on it is beyond me and really make your whole argument redundant, how do you know the acting will be unrealistic the episodes haven't even aired yet.
  • xTonixxTonix Posts: 56,187
    Forum Member
    Good post. This could be a good post to end it on cos going round in circles and i'll get banned at this rate for expressing an opinion (i purposely didn't put this in soaps as it's hardly pro EE!!)

    Yes they are doing it for ratings and I will never know how people enjoy watching this acted out badly and in an unrealistic ott way BUT if they do they do.

    It should be on after 9pm though, crack addiction and downfall at 7.30 is just laughable it really is, how can anyone defend this!!! And whilst the above poster may stop a 7 yr old watching it (quite rightly) the majority won't , and that's the tragedy :mad:

    We havn't even seen the episode yet :rolleyes:
  • CrazyeyeskillerCrazyeyeskiller Posts: 4,869
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Harlowe wrote: »
    Do you have children? you seem almighty interested in the welfare of the young viewing public.

    Because it only in your opinion that its all what you've written above, where is your prove to back up your posts about what psychological effect you seem to think this will do to a child, people have a choice to watch what ever they choose you keep calling people out on it is beyond me and really make your whole argument redundant, how do you know the acting will be unrealistic the episodes haven't even aired yet.

    Oh i dunno, maybe the previous 25 years? What a ridiculous question. Somehow the acting has managed to detioriate from being awful to woeful in the last 10 years.
This discussion has been closed.