I'd agree with Mick but not so sure about the other two - Max (although I love him) is a weasel and Phil is a bully - does that equal strength? Not sure! The male characters are much weaker than the women at the moment. The only ones I'd remotely class as having strength are Mick, Lee (although we haven't seen much of it yet) and Kush. I might have classed Peter as strong if the actor was better but it doesn't quite ring true for me. Aleks has potential.
The likes of Alfie and Masood, who have played a major role in the past, are completely lost without Kat and Zainab.
Mark Fowler was a good character in that sense. He had strong moral fibre, and wasn't scared of the likes of Phil. To some extent I think EE has suffered without characters like him, as male characters over the last few years have tended to be either well-meaning chancers or outright villains.
I suppose Charlie Slater was an exception. He was a good man.
No
He's under a lot of stress but that doesn't stop him being a strong character...I wouldn't say he's mentally unstable either, he got very angry at his wife's rapist, and won't mercy-kill his suicide-capable father...all seems quite rational to me...
Mark Fowler was a good character in that sense. He had strong moral fibre, and wasn't scared of the likes of Phil. To some extent I think EE has suffered without characters like him, as male characters over the last few years have tended to be either well-meaning chancers or outright villains.
I suppose Charlie Slater was an exception. He was a good man.
Very true.
I think it points to an issue with the writing of the show over the last decade - the team seem to be going too much with high concept IDEAS for characters that usually fall into the same mould rather than thought-out, nuanced and realistic individuals like they developed with the likes of Mark Fowler.
Often it's because they are happy to do complete U-turns or personality transplants with characters to fit the latest sensationalist storyline.
Thankfully, Mick has been a notable exception of the recent additions, and Kush shows promise. Hopefully character realisation and development is heading in a stronger direction than it has been.
I'm not sure about Charlie. I think because he's Nick's son I rather switched off when he was first introduced as I can't stand Nick and didn't really want to know. So the whole pretending to be in the police thing rather confused me as I don't really understand what motivated him. Likewise why was he paying Nick to play dead? And why did he fall apart over Ronnie to the extent that he pretty much rejected his son? I guess we can put the latter down to shock but I'm not convinced he's the man to rely on in a crisis!
I'm not sure about Charlie. I think because he's Nick's son I rather switched off when he was first introduced as I can't stand Nick and didn't really want to know. So the whole pretending to be in the police thing rather confused me as I don't really understand what motivated him. Likewise why was he paying Nick to play dead? And why did he fall apart over Ronnie to the extent that he pretty much rejected his son? I guess we can put the latter down to shock but I'm not convinced he's the man to rely on in a crisis!
I controversially don't like Dot or Nick. Well, I'm more bored of Dot than anything else. I turned off for two weeks after Linda's rape and seemed to have missed quite a bit, but I'll do my best...
Charlie grew up believing Nick's lies that Dot was an evil, bitter old woman who wanted nothing more to do with nick, and that it was all her fault he turned out the way her did.
Nick got into a lot of trouble with some dodgy people who were going to kill him, so "the only thing to do" was fake Nick's death. And then he gave him money to get away to safety, except NIck being Nick, wanted more and more.
Charlie pretended to be a police officer alongside Les Coker in order to get a glimpse of Dot and find out if she really was the person Nick claimed.
I didn't understand falling apart over Ronnie, this is why I believe Charlie and Roxy have more chemistry, but I think I might have missed an important bit in their storyline. I've never bought their "madly in love" stuff. Yeah, I'm sure they're really into each other, and they have a baby, but they're not Romeo and Juliet...
A strong character shouldn't equal just physical strength. As stated about Mark Fowler, a strong male character should be a character that is realistic and nuanced and holds a presence. That could knock out a lot of male characters, but the same could be said for the female characters on that front.
Though Eastenders does tend to be slightly better at writing women than men even though they keep falling into tired stereotypes/perceptions of women that affect what otherwise would've been strong female characters like Ronnie Mitchell and Whitney Dean.
I'm not sure about Charlie. I think because he's Nick's son I rather switched off when he was first introduced as I can't stand Nick and didn't really want to know. So the whole pretending to be in the police thing rather confused me as I don't really understand what motivated him. Likewise why was he paying Nick to play dead? And why did he fall apart over Ronnie to the extent that he pretty much rejected his son? I guess we can put the latter down to shock but I'm not convinced he's the man to rely on in a crisis!
Yes, the jury's still out for me on Charlie. He did show strength when he went back to Dot instead of running away, because he knew Nick could come after her, and he did batter Ben, although he did get the wrong bloke. And he eventually turned his back on his father and mother.
At the same time he's shown himself willing to negotiate, admit when he's wrong and accept his faults, and the faults of others. But I don't necessarily see these as weaknesses. I think he's one to watch.
Charlie has shown incredible self-awareness since he's been onscreen. He has major faults (which he typically owns up to very quickly), and understands that his upbringing and parentage have done him a lot of harm in life. He seems really eager to make a new family for himself - with Ronnie, Matthew, and Dot - and do whatever it takes to be a good man in spite of his father's legacy.
In fact, I'd say Charlie is similar to Mick in that respect. Mick had a similarly fractured family and realized early on that he needed to separate himself from that family to be a stronger man. He's devoted twenty odd years of his life to caring for Linda and his kids, largely staying away from the rest of the Carter clan and has a lot to show for it - a strong marriage, well-adjusted kids, and his own business. It's a bit of a shame that reuniting with his family seems to be bringing on such horrible things to Mick and his core family, although he's proven that his strength in spades through his support of Linda. I get the idea that no matter how awful it is for them now, they'll come through okay.
Charlie has shown incredible self-awareness since he's been onscreen. He has major faults (which he typically owns up to very quickly), and understands that his upbringing and parentage have done him a lot of harm in life. He seems really eager to make a new family for himself - with Ronnie, Matthew, and Dot - and do whatever it takes to be a good man in spite of his father's legacy.
In fact, I'd say Charlie is similar to Mick in that respect. Mick had a similarly fractured family and realized early on that he needed to separate himself from that family to be a stronger man. He's devoted twenty odd years of his life to caring for Linda and his kids, largely staying away from the rest of the Carter clan and has a lot to show for it - a strong marriage, well-adjusted kids, and his own business. It's a bit of a shame that reuniting with his family seems to be bringing on such horrible things to Mick and his core family, although he's proven that his strength in spades through his support of Linda. I get the idea that no matter how awful it is for them now, they'll come through okay.
Very good post.
Mick and Charlie seem good, tough reliable characters who accept all of their faults - the Philth may be the 'Hardest Man Who Has Ever Lived. TM.' but being an abusive, cowardly bully and an addict hardly qualifies him as a genuinely strong person.
Aleks could well come to the fore in the future and Kush seems like a decent bloke (and is built like a living brick-outhouse into the bargain).
Max like the Philth is an excellent character but I would hardly call him strong (that todger of his gets him into all sorts of trouble) but perhaps this will change.
Comments
The likes of Alfie and Masood, who have played a major role in the past, are completely lost without Kat and Zainab.
Mick is mentally unstable atm and Dean is unpredictable, ian usually is pressured into things.
From what little we've seen of him, I think Liam would become a strong character if he takes on a father role for Beth.
I suppose Charlie Slater was an exception. He was a good man.
In seriousness, I agree about Mark and Charlie.
He's under a lot of stress but that doesn't stop him being a strong character...I wouldn't say he's mentally unstable either, he got very angry at his wife's rapist, and won't mercy-kill his suicide-capable father...all seems quite rational to me...
Kush could be, Charlie is.
Very true.
I think it points to an issue with the writing of the show over the last decade - the team seem to be going too much with high concept IDEAS for characters that usually fall into the same mould rather than thought-out, nuanced and realistic individuals like they developed with the likes of Mark Fowler.
Often it's because they are happy to do complete U-turns or personality transplants with characters to fit the latest sensationalist storyline.
Thankfully, Mick has been a notable exception of the recent additions, and Kush shows promise. Hopefully character realisation and development is heading in a stronger direction than it has been.
I controversially don't like Dot or Nick. Well, I'm more bored of Dot than anything else. I turned off for two weeks after Linda's rape and seemed to have missed quite a bit, but I'll do my best...
Charlie grew up believing Nick's lies that Dot was an evil, bitter old woman who wanted nothing more to do with nick, and that it was all her fault he turned out the way her did.
Nick got into a lot of trouble with some dodgy people who were going to kill him, so "the only thing to do" was fake Nick's death. And then he gave him money to get away to safety, except NIck being Nick, wanted more and more.
Charlie pretended to be a police officer alongside Les Coker in order to get a glimpse of Dot and find out if she really was the person Nick claimed.
I didn't understand falling apart over Ronnie, this is why I believe Charlie and Roxy have more chemistry, but I think I might have missed an important bit in their storyline. I've never bought their "madly in love" stuff. Yeah, I'm sure they're really into each other, and they have a baby, but they're not Romeo and Juliet...
Though Eastenders does tend to be slightly better at writing women than men even though they keep falling into tired stereotypes/perceptions of women that affect what otherwise would've been strong female characters like Ronnie Mitchell and Whitney Dean.
Yes, the jury's still out for me on Charlie. He did show strength when he went back to Dot instead of running away, because he knew Nick could come after her, and he did batter Ben, although he did get the wrong bloke. And he eventually turned his back on his father and mother.
At the same time he's shown himself willing to negotiate, admit when he's wrong and accept his faults, and the faults of others. But I don't necessarily see these as weaknesses. I think he's one to watch.
In fact, I'd say Charlie is similar to Mick in that respect. Mick had a similarly fractured family and realized early on that he needed to separate himself from that family to be a stronger man. He's devoted twenty odd years of his life to caring for Linda and his kids, largely staying away from the rest of the Carter clan and has a lot to show for it - a strong marriage, well-adjusted kids, and his own business. It's a bit of a shame that reuniting with his family seems to be bringing on such horrible things to Mick and his core family, although he's proven that his strength in spades through his support of Linda. I get the idea that no matter how awful it is for them now, they'll come through okay.
Very good post.
Mick and Charlie seem good, tough reliable characters who accept all of their faults - the Philth may be the 'Hardest Man Who Has Ever Lived. TM.' but being an abusive, cowardly bully and an addict hardly qualifies him as a genuinely strong person.
Aleks could well come to the fore in the future and Kush seems like a decent bloke (and is built like a living brick-outhouse into the bargain).
Max like the Philth is an excellent character but I would hardly call him strong (that todger of his gets him into all sorts of trouble) but perhaps this will change.