As others have pointed out, Annie never owned the pub - just the tenancy. Even if she did own it, she would have left it to her kids - her beloved Billy and Joanie - over Betty. When Annie retired in 1984, she was adamant that Billy take on the tenancy to keep up the Walker name and association with the Rovers. Billy made a mess of things, got into trouble for serving out of hours, and more or less got forced out by the brewery (IIRC). The brewery bought back the tenancy and put in a succession of temporary managers before giving Bet the position. This was the end of the Walker's association with the Rovers.
I agree with the poster who said that this isn't just a minor tweaking of the show's history - there were lots of stories in the 80s and 90s about Newton and Ridley and their involvement with the Rovers - which it seems silly to rubbish just as a way of paying tribute to Betty. Surely they could have thought up something better?
If we really forget what we know about the tenancy/ownership of the Rovers over the years, are we just supposed to think that Betty kept quiet about this all the times she was sacked since Annie left? Or when her friend Bet was desperately trying to keep hold of the place? Or when it burned down and there was a possibility it might not reopen?
I'm all for paying tribute to Betty, but I think this sloppy retcon story is more of an injustice to her.
And as for Rita becoming Mrs Tanner - Pat Phoneix must be turning in her grave.
As others have pointed out, Annie never owned the pub - just the tenancy. Even if she did own it, she would have left it to her kids - her beloved Billy and Joanie - over Betty. When Annie retired in 1984, she was adamant that Billy take on the tenancy to keep up the Walker name and association with the Rovers. Billy made a mess of things, got into trouble for serving out of hours, and more or less got forced out by the brewery (IIRC). The brewery bought back the tenancy and put in a succession of temporary managers before giving Bet the position. This was the end of the Walker's association with the Rovers.
I agree with the poster who said that this isn't just a minor tweaking of the show's history - there were lots of stories in the 80s and 90s about Newton and Ridley and their involvement with the Rovers - which it seems silly to rubbish just as a way of paying tribute to Betty. Surely they could have thought up something better?
If we really forget what we know about the tenancy/ownership of the Rovers over the years, are we just supposed to think that Betty kept quiet about this all the times she was sacked since Annie left? Or when her friend Bet was desperately trying to keep hold of the place? Or when it burned down and there was a possibility it might not reopen?
I'm all for paying tribute to Betty, but I think this sloppy retcon story is more of an injustice to her.
And as for Rita becoming Mrs Tanner - Pat Phoneix must be turning in her grave.
As others have pointed out, Annie never owned the pub - just the tenancy. Even if she did own it, she would have left it to her kids - her beloved Billy and Joanie - over Betty. When Annie retired in 1984, she was adamant that Billy take on the tenancy to keep up the Walker name and association with the Rovers. Billy made a mess of things, got into trouble for serving out of hours, and more or less got forced out by the brewery (IIRC). The brewery bought back the tenancy and put in a succession of temporary managers before giving Bet the position. This was the end of the Walker's association with the Rovers.
I agree with the poster who said that this isn't just a minor tweaking of the show's history - there were lots of stories in the 80s and 90s about Newton and Ridley and their involvement with the Rovers - which it seems silly to rubbish just as a way of paying tribute to Betty. Surely they could have thought up something better?
If we really forget what we know about the tenancy/ownership of the Rovers over the years, are we just supposed to think that Betty kept quiet about this all the times she was sacked since Annie left? Or when her friend Bet was desperately trying to keep hold of the place? Or when it burned down and there was a possibility it might not reopen?
I'm all for paying tribute to Betty, but I think this sloppy retcon story is more of an injustice to her.
And as for Rita becoming Mrs Tanner - Pat Phoneix must be turning in her grave.
Why not just have a nice normal funeral, hot pot all round at the wake, and a decent tribute would have been the return of Bet & Hilda, who could spend a decent bit of time remembering classic Betty moments, maybe even with flashbacks - much more realistic, much more fitting.
For some reason, every type of storyline thesedays has to have an unbelieveable twist - a funeral can't just be a funeral, a wedding can't be a nice normal smooth day like they used to be - it's dull, it's far fetched - the reason we loved the Corrie cast of 1960-2000 so much was because they had realism, they did normal things we could all relate to - thesedays all they do is far fetched fantasy with no real viewer connection.
Like Emmerdale, Corrie want us to forget the show existed before the year 2000 - they don't care about old loyal viewers, they obviously have no clue of the shows history, or if they do, they've just torn out all the pages
I thought Tony Warren was still involved with the show, like a God, looking over it & advising - well if he is, how on earth did he pass this complete co*k up?
Doris Speed must be spinning in her grave
As for Rita Fairmuff being kidnapped, again, far fetched and unbelieveable - just let them have a happy wedding & let us celebrate it with them
I think its a bit daft and ridiculous, I know some are saying its a nice touch but it could of been done better.
Even if we presume Annie owned the Rovers and left it to Betty when she died and it turned out Billy sold it to the brewery without permition so technically Betty always owned it, it doesnt add up for Betty to watch her friends, such as Bet, struggle and even leave because of money troubles with buying the pub, surely she would step in and say, I own it, you can have it.
I was secretly hoping it turned out she had won the lottery years ago but she still kept coming to work just because she loved the place so much
Why do people keep saying "It's a fitting tribute to wonderful lady"?! That as maybe, but it's also a huge insult to the millions of viewers who've watched the show for years and are being treated like brain dead morons who couldn't care less if a family of aliens moved in to the street tommorow. I'd rather be one of the ones who care about what is happening to Corrie than some vegetable who can be spoon fed any old vomit and not bat an eyelid.
It's just a light hearted sub-plot. A little tribute to Betty to reflect her role in the show. Nothing more, nothing less.
I find this post quite insulting, not only to the character of Betty but also to the intelligence of the viewers who invest a lot of passion and commitment to the show.
Why do people keep saying "It's a fitting tribute to wonderful lady"?! That as maybe, but it's also a huge insult to the millions of viewers who've watched the show for years and are being treated like brain dead morons who couldn't care less if a family of aliens moved in to the street tommorow. I'd rather be one of the ones who care about what is happening to Corrie than some vegetable who can be spoon fed any old vomit and not bat an eyelid.
Spot on!
As contrived as the re-written death of Elsie, not to mention Ken's long-lost son (who seems to be as forgotten as much as Michelle's real son)
I suppose that when Ken dies, it'll turn out that Mike Baldwin secretly left the factory to him:D
Even if it was a credible storyline I don't see how anyone could consider this a nice tribute to Betty. Bet and Betty were very close. Losing The Rovers broke Bet. For Betty to stand back and let her go under like that, watching her belittle herself and grovel to Rita and Vicky who turned her down, would make her false, cold-hearted and no friend.
Far from being a nice tribute it casts doubt on her character and would surely make anyone who knew her wonder just how well they actually did know her. Bet would be devastated to find this out about her "friend"! It's an insult to the memory of a kind, dependable and sympathetic character.
Yeah, the most ridiculous part of this definitely is Betty keeping her mouth shut about it when Bet lost the Rovers. Maybe they thought people would just forget about this little tidbit! :O
Not quite - the Walkers had the Rovers tenancy but not the pub. When Newton & Ridley bought Billy out in 1984 they were buying the tenancy. Bet then ran it for two years as a manager before using Alec's money to buy the tenancy in 1987 (and again from 1992 to 1995 when the brewery bought Alec out). If Annie had owned it outright, the brewery wouldn't have had any say in how she ran it but this clearly wasn't the case as she was always answering to them.
This isn't some obscure piece of trivia mentioned a couple of times, it was a huge part of the show from 1960 until 1995!
Good post with which I agree with. Annie never owned the bricks and mortar.
There is no way that the pub should be going to the coffers of Everton FC:mad:
As contrived as the re-written death of Elsie, not to mention Ken's long-lost son (who seems to be as forgotten as much as Michelle's real son)
I suppose that when Ken dies, it'll turn out that Mike Baldwin secretly left the factory to him:D
Apparently it turns out Ken owns the entire street and is the legal owner of all the buildings including The Rovers, in his will it states he wishes nobody to live on his street, forcing everybody to build an entire new Coronation Street at the Docks in Salford with several improvements. Or have I confused one ridiculous plot with another and come up with something even more far-fetched.
The plots are getting audiences so what do they care? What they are doing, sort of cleverly, is having the usual outlandish 'oh look here comes another murderer'-type plot, then they sprinkle it with stories like these that namecheck the golden era to give it a sheen of 'Old Corrie'. Whereas its actually more like Hollyoaks nowadays.
As an example - PC on telly the other morning saying Rita and Dennis would marry and create another Mrs Tanner on the street - he said "How good is that?". Basically thats the whole point of the plot; that producers and writers can relive their childhood.... Meanwhile the core plots are barmy.
I said this in another thread a week or so ago. The old adage about characters coming before storylines in Corrie is being well and truly squashed isn't it?! So it basically validates people's thoughts about the whole Dennis/Rita storyline in that they've had barely any scenes together, then Dennis might leave and Rita is suddenly devastated and then tgey are getting married! Well where did that come from??? Did Julian Fellowes write this storyline?! I'm convinced Collinson is NOT the best thing for Corrie. He's all about sensationalism and drumming up tabloid interest. He's a PR man, nothing more, thats all he was on Dr Who, ruled with a rod of iron by Russell T Davies.
Thing is, nothing we can say will change this stupidity, and ITV will only realise this when people begin to switch off due to the lack of realism or continuety
Makes you wonder who sits around that story confrence table, what knowledge they hold of the programme, what dedication they have for it's history & audience, because with plots like this, it can't be much
Thing is, nothing we can say will change this stupidity, and ITV will only realise this when people begin to switch off due to the lack of realism or continuety
Makes you wonder who sits around that story confrence table, what knowledge they hold of the programme, what dedication they have for it's history & audience, because with plots like this, it can't be much
Maybe they pluck students from bottom set English GCSE classes to storyline the show these days?
I think you're being too harsh on the scriptwriters, Corrie is the best it's been in years at the moment. I'm going to wait and see how this pans out.
In your opinion. In my opinion it's getting worse. An increase in shouting/needless nastiness, over the top stunts, a stream of nutters/murderers. It's becoming unbearable to me. And yes some might say "Well don't watch then". Well, it may well come to that if it carries on this way. Yes there are still some great characters and actors but it just doesn't seem the same anymore. I had to give up watching Neighbours a few years ago because it began to change beyond recognition, and now when I tune in occasionally it just seems like a completely different show. I hope this doesn't happen to Corrie. However the ever more desperate chase for ratings/short term attention seem more important in all soaps than long term care/consideration these days.
I find this post quite insulting, not only to the character of Betty but also to the intelligence of the viewers who invest a lot of passion and commitment to the show.
I think you're being too harsh on the scriptwriters, Corrie is the best it's been in years at the moment. I'm going to wait and see how this pans out.
IMHO - Scencia is absolutely right. Corrie scriptwriters are a disgrace to the programme and seem to think the viewers are complete idiots. Time after time they do this sort of thing. I don't mind the occasional continuity error for the sake of a good story but with Corrie it's it all the time. They write the storylines how they want the plots to go and to hell with the facts and logic.
E.g. The big storyline; Frank's murder was ridiculous. Carla's arrested. Shock horror. Not. Peter's arrested. Shock horror. Not. And that was it. A see-saw who-dun-it between the 2. Then it turns out it was Anne all along. We didn't see that coming, did we? :rolleyes:
Corrie scriptwriters are a disgrace to the programme and seem to think the viewers are complete idiots.
Correct - the scriptwriters thesedays are only chasing ratings, they are stretching the programme out 6 times a week (back in the day, this equalled a full months worth of episodes) - I can understand the pressures they are under, to get the viewers, to keep it fresh after 50 years, to try & shock in every scene, but to just write stupidity is not the way, it reflects bad on the programme.
Corrie needs scriptwriters who care about what they are writing for, who understand the rich history of the show.
Correct - the scriptwriters thesedays are only chasing ratings, they are stretching the programme out 6 times a week (back in the day, this equalled a full months worth of episodes) - I can understand the pressures they are under, to get the viewers, to keep it fresh after 50 years, to try & shock in every scene, but to just write stupidity is not the way, it reflects bad on the programme.
Corrie needs scriptwriters who care about what they are writing for, who understand the rich history of the show.
Well said! Of course I'm just guessing but most of the script writers on soaps these days probably think they are destined for bigger things and treat writing on Corrie as a stop gap until they get that film script they've wriiten sold to a Hollywood studio! Meaning they have no passion for Corrie etc and don't really give a crap if they are insulting the fans and rewriting history. Ive started thinking we MUST be getting our knickers in a twist about nothing regarding Betty and the Rovers and in reality it will turn out to make sense, I really hope so, because the alternative, that Collinson et al, are taking us for fools is just too sad to contemplate, and will probably result in me switching off for good as I pretty much did with Neighbours and EastEnders.
Wait for it to play out before moaning about it, it might just be a harmless letter for all we know.
I think this too. The posters above should take their complaints to another thread as they aren't even about the Betty story. We still know very little about what's actually going to happen. Maybe Annie wrote to Betty asking her to take over the tenancy if Billy couldn't hack it? We all know Annie could pull strings to get her way with the brewery!
Comments
I agree with the poster who said that this isn't just a minor tweaking of the show's history - there were lots of stories in the 80s and 90s about Newton and Ridley and their involvement with the Rovers - which it seems silly to rubbish just as a way of paying tribute to Betty. Surely they could have thought up something better?
If we really forget what we know about the tenancy/ownership of the Rovers over the years, are we just supposed to think that Betty kept quiet about this all the times she was sacked since Annie left? Or when her friend Bet was desperately trying to keep hold of the place? Or when it burned down and there was a possibility it might not reopen?
I'm all for paying tribute to Betty, but I think this sloppy retcon story is more of an injustice to her.
And as for Rita becoming Mrs Tanner - Pat Phoneix must be turning in her grave.
BIB . Totally agree
Why not just have a nice normal funeral, hot pot all round at the wake, and a decent tribute would have been the return of Bet & Hilda, who could spend a decent bit of time remembering classic Betty moments, maybe even with flashbacks - much more realistic, much more fitting.
For some reason, every type of storyline thesedays has to have an unbelieveable twist - a funeral can't just be a funeral, a wedding can't be a nice normal smooth day like they used to be - it's dull, it's far fetched - the reason we loved the Corrie cast of 1960-2000 so much was because they had realism, they did normal things we could all relate to - thesedays all they do is far fetched fantasy with no real viewer connection.
Like Emmerdale, Corrie want us to forget the show existed before the year 2000 - they don't care about old loyal viewers, they obviously have no clue of the shows history, or if they do, they've just torn out all the pages
I thought Tony Warren was still involved with the show, like a God, looking over it & advising - well if he is, how on earth did he pass this complete co*k up?
Doris Speed must be spinning in her grave
As for Rita Fairmuff being kidnapped, again, far fetched and unbelieveable - just let them have a happy wedding & let us celebrate it with them
Now *that* would have been a good idea!
I find this post quite insulting, not only to the character of Betty but also to the intelligence of the viewers who invest a lot of passion and commitment to the show.
Spot on!
As contrived as the re-written death of Elsie, not to mention Ken's long-lost son (who seems to be as forgotten as much as Michelle's real son)
I suppose that when Ken dies, it'll turn out that Mike Baldwin secretly left the factory to him:D
Far from being a nice tribute it casts doubt on her character and would surely make anyone who knew her wonder just how well they actually did know her. Bet would be devastated to find this out about her "friend"! It's an insult to the memory of a kind, dependable and sympathetic character.
Good post with which I agree with. Annie never owned the bricks and mortar.
There is no way that the pub should be going to the coffers of Everton FC:mad:
Apparently it turns out Ken owns the entire street and is the legal owner of all the buildings including The Rovers, in his will it states he wishes nobody to live on his street, forcing everybody to build an entire new Coronation Street at the Docks in Salford with several improvements. Or have I confused one ridiculous plot with another and come up with something even more far-fetched.
They must have forgot that story happened.
I said this in another thread a week or so ago. The old adage about characters coming before storylines in Corrie is being well and truly squashed isn't it?! So it basically validates people's thoughts about the whole Dennis/Rita storyline in that they've had barely any scenes together, then Dennis might leave and Rita is suddenly devastated and then tgey are getting married! Well where did that come from??? Did Julian Fellowes write this storyline?! I'm convinced Collinson is NOT the best thing for Corrie. He's all about sensationalism and drumming up tabloid interest. He's a PR man, nothing more, thats all he was on Dr Who, ruled with a rod of iron by Russell T Davies.
Makes you wonder who sits around that story confrence table, what knowledge they hold of the programme, what dedication they have for it's history & audience, because with plots like this, it can't be much
Maybe they pluck students from bottom set English GCSE classes to storyline the show these days?
Joking aside, you could be right, it's certainly be more believeable than these stupid stories they are coming up with
In your opinion. In my opinion it's getting worse. An increase in shouting/needless nastiness, over the top stunts, a stream of nutters/murderers. It's becoming unbearable to me. And yes some might say "Well don't watch then". Well, it may well come to that if it carries on this way. Yes there are still some great characters and actors but it just doesn't seem the same anymore. I had to give up watching Neighbours a few years ago because it began to change beyond recognition, and now when I tune in occasionally it just seems like a completely different show. I hope this doesn't happen to Corrie. However the ever more desperate chase for ratings/short term attention seem more important in all soaps than long term care/consideration these days.
IMHO - Scencia is absolutely right. Corrie scriptwriters are a disgrace to the programme and seem to think the viewers are complete idiots. Time after time they do this sort of thing. I don't mind the occasional continuity error for the sake of a good story but with Corrie it's it all the time. They write the storylines how they want the plots to go and to hell with the facts and logic.
E.g. The big storyline; Frank's murder was ridiculous. Carla's arrested. Shock horror. Not. Peter's arrested. Shock horror. Not. And that was it. A see-saw who-dun-it between the 2. Then it turns out it was Anne all along. We didn't see that coming, did we? :rolleyes:
Out of interest, how many years have you watched?
For true real quality (coronation) street, watch 1960-2000 - the glory years, then come back with this statement again
Correct - the scriptwriters thesedays are only chasing ratings, they are stretching the programme out 6 times a week (back in the day, this equalled a full months worth of episodes) - I can understand the pressures they are under, to get the viewers, to keep it fresh after 50 years, to try & shock in every scene, but to just write stupidity is not the way, it reflects bad on the programme.
Corrie needs scriptwriters who care about what they are writing for, who understand the rich history of the show.
Well said! Of course I'm just guessing but most of the script writers on soaps these days probably think they are destined for bigger things and treat writing on Corrie as a stop gap until they get that film script they've wriiten sold to a Hollywood studio! Meaning they have no passion for Corrie etc and don't really give a crap if they are insulting the fans and rewriting history. Ive started thinking we MUST be getting our knickers in a twist about nothing regarding Betty and the Rovers and in reality it will turn out to make sense, I really hope so, because the alternative, that Collinson et al, are taking us for fools is just too sad to contemplate, and will probably result in me switching off for good as I pretty much did with Neighbours and EastEnders.
I think this too. The posters above should take their complaints to another thread as they aren't even about the Betty story. We still know very little about what's actually going to happen. Maybe Annie wrote to Betty asking her to take over the tenancy if Billy couldn't hack it? We all know Annie could pull strings to get her way with the brewery!