I too cannot wait for this storyline to be over, it broke my heart when they took Lexi away and the way Phil shouts and speaks to Lola is disgusting, he only had 3 months custody initially (or did I dream that?) so it must be coming up to that now.
maybe that is how they manage the annual McFadden exit, the judge gives Lola custody back and he can't handle it and goes off to the Mitchell bolthole in portugal.
I guess Phil would visit Peggy and Grant during his panto break.
I too cannot wait for this storyline to be over, it broke my heart when they took Lexi away and the way Phil shouts and speaks to Lola is disgusting, he only had 3 months custody initially (or did I dream that?) so it must be coming up to that now.
maybe that is how they manage the annual McFadden exit, the judge gives Lola custody back and he can't handle it and goes off to the Mitchell bolthole in portugal.
It would be so boring though and i think if that happened we'd never see phils true motives. Something big needs to happen
right we all know lola will get lexi back but how and when? is it going to be dragged out for months? it seems like its being really slow for some reason. theres hardly a lot of development being done. all we get is phil being shouty at lola and now lola will probably think sharon wont be around to help which means phil will be more controlling etc
we dont even know phils true motives
Why does Philth, refer to her as his baby or daddy phil?
really weird and annoying?
I find it too unbelievable, I don't believe that Phil would be allowed to arrange the christening or change Lexis surname. I'm sure he wouldn't have got custody in the first place and I thought that it was only temporary custody he got anyway (giving him even less chance of being allowed to sort out the christening). Why is no social working visiting Phil and are they not supposed to review the case regularly?
BIB - the Christening did not change Lexi's surname. Her surname is on her birth certificate, and that says 'Pierce'. Now, unless they've changed that off-camera as well, by deed poll (a legal process that takes a bit of time and money to arrange, even though it's relatively simple to do) and just not bothered to tell the viewers, then Lexi is still 'Pierce'. Phil could have insisted on 'Mickey Mouse' at the Christening, and it wouldn't have changed what is legally on her birth certificate. Anyway, you don't need a surname at a Christening - that was only added for dramatic effect to create the conflict for Lola about how far she dare challenge Phil. A Christening, or any kind of naming ceremony in any context, cannot be used to legally change a child's name - usually you're just reiterating what's on the birth certificate. Although at a stretch, if you were in possession of a legal change to the name on a child's certificate for any reason (e.g. adopting that child as your own and wanting to give it your own surname or a new first name) and you wanted to announce it to everyone in the family at the same time, you could use the Christening to do it... but it's hardly what has happened in EE! At no point has any change of the birth certificate been mentioned - except once, if I recall, by Lola herself who reminded Phil that it was 'Pierce' on Lexi's!
The whole thing has been ridiculously handled anyway. My friends who work in Children's Services over here (our equivalent of 'Social Services') are in despair at the effect this poorly done story line has had on young teenage girls who are now too scared to say they are struggling, when there's help there to keep the baby with the mum whatever it takes as long as the baby isn't in any danger of abuse of some sort. Presumably the UK version is not much happier about it either. Even a relatively minor conviction such as Lola's would not put her the position of losing her child - another friend of mine supervises Community Service locally and he has loads of young single mums, with worse offending/conviction records than Lola's, and they still have their babies, albeit with lots of support. Simply being inexperienced in caring for a baby, even being relatively incompetent at first, has never been a reason to do to a young Mum what EE have done to Lola.
Added to that the fact that the whole thing has only ever really about what they want to do with Phil anyway (still exploring the fall-out from losing Ben and his rather twisted idea of 'family' essentially). Lola and Lexi are just pawns in a game to advance (or not) Phil's character, in relation to Ben, Jay, Sharon etc, and Lola's story is just a convenient contrivance, nothing more - that's probably why they've been so cavalier in how they've portrayed it from the start re the badly drawn social workers etc. I don't like Lola's character, particularly (although I like the actress) but Lola's character been done a terrible disservice by this story line and not given a chance to grow and evolve enough through it. A wasted chance.
So yes, like others, I'm fed up with this story line for lots of reasons. When EE can do some things so well, they do constantly mess up other things - and this story line has not been one of their better efforts.
It would be so boring though and i think if that happened we'd never see phils true motives. Something big needs to happen
Why? Just because you think it would be boring isn't really relevant to anything really - one person's boring is another person's perfectly ok, thank you. You always seem to be waiting for something 'big' or 'complex' but this is just a common or garden soap opera where they are in the business of churning out episodes and characters without worrying too much about the impact of them unless the characters involved are 'flavour of the month' or whatever. It's been 'big' enough already, now it's just frustrating. Get it sorted, quickly and quietly, and then we can all forget it. Let's face it, EE will forget it - it'll probably be forgotten, or retconned, by this time next year anyway!
Why? Just because you think it would be boring isn't really relevant to anything really - one person's boring is another person's perfectly ok, thank you. You always seem to be waiting for something 'big' or 'complex' but this is just a common or garden soap opera where they are in the business of churning out episodes and characters without worrying too much about the impact of them unless the characters involved are 'flavour of the month' or whatever. It's been 'big' enough already, now it's just frustrating. Get it sorted, quickly and quietly, and then we can all forget it. Let's face it, EE will forget it - it'll probably be forgotten, or retconned, by this time next year anyway!
This. I think people expect too much from EE sometimes. Even I admit I do but it's changed so much from the old days. It's been 3 weeks since the Kat reveal, yet we still don't have the foggiest why she went for Derek and so far the overall aftermath has been crap. We've had no insight into Kat's motives whatsoever. I'm sure it will maybe come out but now the big reveal is over and they've had their "explosive" few episodes, I doubt TPTB even care about telling us anymore. So I doubt they are going to go into some great insight about Phil's motives either. It's all so plot driven nowadays rather than about character development. Like you say, it's just all about churning the episodes and characters out.
Not suprising. When does Phil go off screen for Steve's panto break roughly? Nice to see EE will be dragging this plot line on for a few more months then :yawn:
Not suprising. When does Phil go off screen for Steve's panto break roughly? Nice to see EE will be dragging this plot line on for a few more months then :yawn:
BIB - the Christening did not change Lexi's surname. Her surname is
Why? Just because you think it would be boring isn't really relevant to anything really - one person's boring is another person's perfectly ok, thank you. You always seem to be waiting for something 'big' or 'complex' but this is just a common or garden soap opera where they are in the business of churning out episodes and characters without worrying too much about the impact of them unless the characters involved are 'flavour of the month' or whatever. It's been 'big' enough already, now it's just frustrating. Get it sorted, quickly and quietly, and then we can all forget it. Let's face it, EE will forget it - it'll probably be forgotten, or retconned, by this time next year anyway!
they have made it complex. A lot of people are confused on what phils true motives are, i have no idea what he wants or why hes doing this(have my own theory's but probably not right) his proposal speech to sharon clearly wasnt about marrying her.
People complain when they drag s/l's out for months but at least some have had good reveals like kats affair. This has been going on since september and looks like to carry on till march at least surely we deserve a good ending ? The way lorraine spoke about how and when lola will get her back makes me think there will be
they have made it complex. A lot of people are confused on what phils true motives are, i have no idea what he wants or why hes doing this(have my own theory's but probably not right) his proposal speech to sharon clearly wasnt about marrying her.
People complain when they drag s/l's out for months but at least some have had good reveals like kats affair. This has been going on since september and looks like to carry on till march at least surely we deserve a good ending ? The way lorraine spoke about how and when lola will get her back makes me think there will be
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't think it is complicated at all. Phil has a proven track record of taking ownership of anything vaguely Mitchell (including people) and of taking other's children to replace his own. Jamie after Kathy took Ben to SA, Jay after Ben wasn't shaping up to be the son he wanted. This is just the latest chapter. He's lost Ben and Louise so he wants another chance (probably his last chance) to bring up a Mitchell. He wants to replace the family he has lost and Lexi is that opportunity. He also wants to look as good as he can for SS so they leave him alone and complete the 'dream' by having a wife around with the added benefit that they will deal with the harder aspect of parenting as he expected Lisa to with Jamie, Kate to with Louise and then Stella and Shirley with Ben. Sharon fits the score as a wife and mother and she brings Dennis along too - great. Finally, he probably still views her as Mitchell and doesn't want Jack having her. Plus of course, he probably still fancies her and Phil always wants someone to warm his bed.
Maybe I've over simplified it but that is my understanding.
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't think it is complicated at all. Phil has a proven track record of taking ownership of anything vaguely Mitchell (including people) and of taking other's children to replace his own. Jamie after Kathy took Ben to SA, Jay after Ben wasn't shaping up to be the son he wanted. This is just the latest chapter. He's lost Ben and Louise so he wants another chance (probably his last chance) to bring up a Mitchell. He wants to replace the family he has lost and Lexi is that opportunity. He also wants to look as good as he can for SS so they leave him alone and complete the 'dream' by having a wife around with the added benefit that they will deal with the harder aspect of parenting as he expected Lisa to with Jamie, Kate to with Louise and then Stella and Shirley with Ben. Sharon fits the score as a wife and mother and she brings Dennis along too - great. Finally, he probably still views her as Mitchell and doesn't want Jack having her. Plus of course, he probably still fancies her and Phil always wants someone to warm his bed.
Maybe I've over simplified it but that is my understanding.
I also agree that it is unrealistic to have plots and character motivations spelt out on screen. Aside from how they could do it so we knew it was definately the truth (as even if Phil told Shirley he loved her, those that don't see it could argue he is lying, same if he did it with Sharon), a session with a therapist would seem to be the only way to me. Full and frank disclosure to an uninterested third party. The other thing is that writers don't want to box themselves in to that extent. They need situations to be changeable in the future to suit new plots, to that end certain things must be left enigmatic. The only time it can ever really happen is if they know for sure a character will never be needed again, it is the end of their story arc so their last episode really.
Now that is frustrating if you are very emotionally invested in a character or a relationship but unfortunately it is the nature of long running story telling. It is not a book with a beginning, a middle and a definate end where these things can be spelt out because you are reading a characters thoughts.
Comments
I guess Phil would visit Peggy and Grant during his panto break.
It would be so boring though and i think if that happened we'd never see phils true motives. Something big needs to happen
Why does Philth, refer to her as his baby or daddy phil?
really weird and annoying?
Are you thinking that Phil is really the father of Lola's child?
Omg seemed like i was the only one who thought this!! And he was like sharon is the "grandmother"or " auntie" i thought he wanted her to be the mother
No he wants lexi to be his to create this weird happy family
I also love how fast he can replace Ben,
When Ben was in the Youth Offenders,
He made a son out of Jay,
And now his replacing him for Lexi,
To be fair at least jay didnt have any real parents around him. Lexi has lola. I dont think this is the same
but Phil does replace him in a way
Yeah but this time phil is being more of a nutter than he ever was before
Bollocks now that is bad news
BIB - the Christening did not change Lexi's surname. Her surname is on her birth certificate, and that says 'Pierce'. Now, unless they've changed that off-camera as well, by deed poll (a legal process that takes a bit of time and money to arrange, even though it's relatively simple to do) and just not bothered to tell the viewers, then Lexi is still 'Pierce'. Phil could have insisted on 'Mickey Mouse' at the Christening, and it wouldn't have changed what is legally on her birth certificate. Anyway, you don't need a surname at a Christening - that was only added for dramatic effect to create the conflict for Lola about how far she dare challenge Phil. A Christening, or any kind of naming ceremony in any context, cannot be used to legally change a child's name - usually you're just reiterating what's on the birth certificate. Although at a stretch, if you were in possession of a legal change to the name on a child's certificate for any reason (e.g. adopting that child as your own and wanting to give it your own surname or a new first name) and you wanted to announce it to everyone in the family at the same time, you could use the Christening to do it... but it's hardly what has happened in EE! At no point has any change of the birth certificate been mentioned - except once, if I recall, by Lola herself who reminded Phil that it was 'Pierce' on Lexi's!
The whole thing has been ridiculously handled anyway. My friends who work in Children's Services over here (our equivalent of 'Social Services') are in despair at the effect this poorly done story line has had on young teenage girls who are now too scared to say they are struggling, when there's help there to keep the baby with the mum whatever it takes as long as the baby isn't in any danger of abuse of some sort. Presumably the UK version is not much happier about it either. Even a relatively minor conviction such as Lola's would not put her the position of losing her child - another friend of mine supervises Community Service locally and he has loads of young single mums, with worse offending/conviction records than Lola's, and they still have their babies, albeit with lots of support. Simply being inexperienced in caring for a baby, even being relatively incompetent at first, has never been a reason to do to a young Mum what EE have done to Lola.
Added to that the fact that the whole thing has only ever really about what they want to do with Phil anyway (still exploring the fall-out from losing Ben and his rather twisted idea of 'family' essentially). Lola and Lexi are just pawns in a game to advance (or not) Phil's character, in relation to Ben, Jay, Sharon etc, and Lola's story is just a convenient contrivance, nothing more - that's probably why they've been so cavalier in how they've portrayed it from the start re the badly drawn social workers etc. I don't like Lola's character, particularly (although I like the actress) but Lola's character been done a terrible disservice by this story line and not given a chance to grow and evolve enough through it. A wasted chance.
So yes, like others, I'm fed up with this story line for lots of reasons. When EE can do some things so well, they do constantly mess up other things - and this story line has not been one of their better efforts.
Why? Just because you think it would be boring isn't really relevant to anything really - one person's boring is another person's perfectly ok, thank you. You always seem to be waiting for something 'big' or 'complex' but this is just a common or garden soap opera where they are in the business of churning out episodes and characters without worrying too much about the impact of them unless the characters involved are 'flavour of the month' or whatever. It's been 'big' enough already, now it's just frustrating. Get it sorted, quickly and quietly, and then we can all forget it. Let's face it, EE will forget it - it'll probably be forgotten, or retconned, by this time next year anyway!
This. I think people expect too much from EE sometimes. Even I admit I do but it's changed so much from the old days. It's been 3 weeks since the Kat reveal, yet we still don't have the foggiest why she went for Derek and so far the overall aftermath has been crap. We've had no insight into Kat's motives whatsoever. I'm sure it will maybe come out but now the big reveal is over and they've had their "explosive" few episodes, I doubt TPTB even care about telling us anymore. So I doubt they are going to go into some great insight about Phil's motives either. It's all so plot driven nowadays rather than about character development. Like you say, it's just all about churning the episodes and characters out.
Not suprising. When does Phil go off screen for Steve's panto break roughly? Nice to see EE will be dragging this plot line on for a few more months then :yawn:
End of jan. i know!! Grr
Yes, I guessed that earlier.
People complain when they drag s/l's out for months but at least some have had good reveals like kats affair. This has been going on since september and looks like to carry on till march at least surely we deserve a good ending ? The way lorraine spoke about how and when lola will get her back makes me think there will be
Oh bloomin' marvellous :sleep:
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't think it is complicated at all. Phil has a proven track record of taking ownership of anything vaguely Mitchell (including people) and of taking other's children to replace his own. Jamie after Kathy took Ben to SA, Jay after Ben wasn't shaping up to be the son he wanted. This is just the latest chapter. He's lost Ben and Louise so he wants another chance (probably his last chance) to bring up a Mitchell. He wants to replace the family he has lost and Lexi is that opportunity. He also wants to look as good as he can for SS so they leave him alone and complete the 'dream' by having a wife around with the added benefit that they will deal with the harder aspect of parenting as he expected Lisa to with Jamie, Kate to with Louise and then Stella and Shirley with Ben. Sharon fits the score as a wife and mother and she brings Dennis along too - great. Finally, he probably still views her as Mitchell and doesn't want Jack having her. Plus of course, he probably still fancies her and Phil always wants someone to warm his bed.
Maybe I've over simplified it but that is my understanding.
I completely agree
Now that is frustrating if you are very emotionally invested in a character or a relationship but unfortunately it is the nature of long running story telling. It is not a book with a beginning, a middle and a definate end where these things can be spelt out because you are reading a characters thoughts.