|
||||||||
EastEnders - Ronnie Mitchell/Samantha Womack Appreciation Thread (Part 9) |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1401 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 116
|
Quote:
I dont want her to do BGT as its a waste of her talent it should be her on the stage (or screen)
![]() Sam is still in SP for about another 3 months then I think she is taking some time off to spend with her family ![]() Thanks for posting links Chelsea. I am really pleased with all the great that Sam is getting as well as the SP cast. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#1402 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London town
Posts: 9,670
|
Blimey! I was about to give up on DS for good keeping me locked out!
Anyhoo Am I the only one that really isn't buying this custody storyline? I have missed a few eps, so do correct me if I am wrong, but as far as I am aware, Roxy is not being investigated for child neglect so what judge in his right mind would rule that a little girl who has lived with her mother all her life should be living with her dad all of a sudden?? Jack is as good as an absent father - yes in the past Roxy used to say Amy was with Jack, however, whenever someone says to Jack: "You have a daughter upstairs that you don't see" he doesn't dispute their claim. The Brannings never really gave a damn about Amy as well so why all the sudden concern and backing Jack up when he refuses to let Roxy see Amy? I know families stick together but only Tanya has stood up and said that she disagreed with what Jack was doing. Why has Ronnie not been mentioned as much as she should? I understand she is in prison, but we could have had a line where Roxy went: "You wait til Ronnie hears about this" or "Ronnie will hate you for doing this to me." When Jack confronted Tanya before her illness, he said: "Ronnie won't see me, and I don't know why," he could have said: "Ronnie won't see me because of me taking Amy away from Roxy but I'm only trying to do what is right by my daughter." Or something along them lines. This storyline could have been really good but all I am doing is shaking my head and picking holes in it. Rita has been very good, but its not enough to make me want to believe in it. And while I'm on the moan, I bet we'll get no James mention over New Years. Not even Jack mentioning he's going to visit his grave ![]() Ooh one last thing, Amy's 3rd birthday wasn't mentioned last month was it? |
|
|
|
|
#1403 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 116
|
Morning all
![]() I found last when i was searching through some imaging sites and i saw some of Sam promoting SP in the theatre in Oxford. She looks amazing as usual. http://picture.belga.be/belgapicture...ch.html?page=1 I hope you like them. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1404 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 116
|
Quote:
Blimey! I was about to give up on DS for good keeping me locked out!
Anyhoo Am I the only one that really isn't buying this custody storyline? I have missed a few eps, so do correct me if I am wrong, but as far as I am aware, Roxy is not being investigated for child neglect so what judge in his right mind would rule that a little girl who has lived with her mother all her life should be living with her dad all of a sudden?? Jack is as good as an absent father - yes in the past Roxy used to say Amy was with Jack, however, whenever someone says to Jack: "You have a daughter upstairs that you don't see" he doesn't dispute their claim. The Brannings never really gave a damn about Amy as well so why all the sudden concern and backing Jack up when he refuses to let Roxy see Amy? I know families stick together but only Tanya has stood up and said that she disagreed with what Jack was doing. Why has Ronnie not been mentioned as much as she should? I understand she is in prison, but we could have had a line where Roxy went: "You wait til Ronnie hears about this" or "Ronnie will hate you for doing this to me." When Jack confronted Tanya before her illness, he said: "Ronnie won't see me, and I don't know why," he could have said: "Ronnie won't see me because of me taking Amy away from Roxy but I'm only trying to do what is right by my daughter." Or something along them lines. This storyline could have been really good but all I am doing is shaking my head and picking holes in it. Rita has been very good, but its not enough to make me want to believe in it. And while I'm on the moan, I bet we'll get no James mention over New Years. Not even Jack mentioning he's going to visit his grave ![]() Ooh one last thing, Amy's 3rd birthday wasn't mentioned last month was it? Roxy who thought she had left Amy in the safe hands of people she trusted - this could have happened to anyone. I think Jack is being a bit of a hypocrite saying Roxy wasn't ever been there for Amy but where has he been for the last 3 years? The storyline is ok but it is not believable to me for the reasons above and it doesn't make sense. Rita and Scott are not doing a bad job - i think it is the material and the lack of research behind the storyline is letting them down. As for the mention of James and visiting his grave on his birthday and the anniversary of his death - it is unlikly that it will happen because as you know it is Tommy's birthday on the same day so i think they will concentrate on that. Bloody Moons!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1405 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 10,192
|
The whole custody battle is not realistic at all and that is what is frustrating about it because it has been used as a plot device for Mitchells and Brannings rivalry, namely Phil.
It is in Jack’s character to act irrationally and on impulse and to lash out after Ronnie refused to see him, and after what happened with James and nearly losing Amy, I can understand him acting like he did originally. I can also see him wanting to keep Amy as he thinks he has no one else left. However he would have calmed down after wards and at least be sensible about contact. I think we are meant to assume that although Jack has not been living with Amy, he has been involved in her life, we have at times seen some evidence of that. Unfortunately for Roxy, she lost her house and has no security, she is living with Phil and Ben who have criminal records. There was the incident that was an accident but also the broken wrist and eventhough we all know that Roxy loves Amy and it is crazy that she is not with her, from social services perceptive there is some ground to complete an assessment. We will hear on Thursday that they remain involved so I am assuming they are assessing Roxy’s parenting. Technically though, Roxy can withdraw her agreement and ask to have Amy returned so the only way Social Services would be able to keep Amy away would be for them to go to court and seek a care order to take Amy in care. IF granted the order will give them shared parental responsibility so they can then make the decision that Jack keeps her whilst the care proceedings continue. Roxy would be contesting it all the way and the fact that she doesn’t have a house is not grounds to keep a child away from her so it will all be about parenting and safety and security. So although to a degree I can see Amy may be left with Jack until assessments are completed, the contact would have never been handled like that. Also the situation between Ronnie and Jack is another reason why this storyline is so frustrating. Ok Ronnie was refusing to see Jack for whatever reason, but surely as soon as Roxy would have told her about the situation with Amy, Ronnie would have agreed to see Jack and talk to him about it. So why is she supposedly not wanting to see him, but rather file for divorce straightway? That is not really Ronnie’s style. I understand that it is the way the storyline was going to go, a divorce, but the way they have gotten to that point feels very forced and doesn’t make sense. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1406 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 10,192
|
I doubt there will be any James mention at all. It is about Tommy and the Moons so no hope there of any mentioning of James.
I am not even sure Jack is in EE that week. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1407 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,127
|
Quote:
Morning all
![]() I found last when i was searching through some imaging sites and i saw some of Sam promoting SP in the theatre in Oxford. She looks amazing as usual. http://picture.belga.be/belgapicture...ch.html?page=1 I hope you like them.
|
|
|
|
|
#1408 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 116
|
Quote:
The link isnt working for me hun
![]() http://picture.belga.be/belgapicture...ch.html?page=1 |
|
|
|
|
|
#1409 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 771
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4uGyRoarLA thought id post it cause sam makes me laugh at 2:38, .....marleneeee xx
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1410 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: ♥Albert Square♥
Posts: 4,027
|
Quote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4uGyRoarLA thought id post it cause sam makes me laugh at 2:38, .....marleneeee xx
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1411 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,127
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#1412 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 116
|
Quote:
Its still not working
![]() Type belga into Google Click on the first link Then you want to click Editorial There is a bit where you can search Type in Samantha Womack then - Search. You should get it then - if not get back to me and sorry but that i thought it was working! |
|
|
|
|
|
#1413 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,110
|
Not the biggest rack fan but I did say when SM annouced she was leaving. They would wait for it to die down then she would go to jail/hospital, refuse to see Jack and then serve divorce papers. So very predictable. But in a way I am glad. I hope Ronnie can finally be free of Jack. And Jack does work better with his family.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1414 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 10,192
|
Quote:
Not the biggest rack fan but I did say when SM annouced she was leaving. They would wait for it to die down then she would go to jail/hospital, refuse to see Jack and then serve divorce papers. So very predictable. But in a way I am glad. I hope Ronnie can finally be free of Jack. And Jack does work better with his family.
I feel the way they have done it is very lazy and doesn't make much sense that Ronnie would file for divorce like this so the main reason this has been done with no explanation is for Branning/Mitchell agro. They should have tried a bit harder to make the point from Ronnie being imprisoned to filing for divorce a bit more realistic and that made sense. It is believable that Ronnie whilst in prison, away from all the craziness has come to the point that she feels Jack and her relationship is dysfunctional, too much has happened, he has children with her relatives and so on, so she wants to end this. However they should have given some reason some explanation. Jack could have had one chat with Roxy originally to explain why Ronnie wasn't seeing him and then gradually build towards divorce and give the reasons for it through Roxy. Anyway, last week was probably the last time Ronnie would be mentioned. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1415 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 10,192
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1416 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,127
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#1417 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 10,192
|
Sam is on ITV2 now. They are showing Cinderella.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1418 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 116
|
Quote:
Its so funny
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#1419 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 10,192
|
Did anyone else watch Sam last night in Cinderella? Not 100% relevant here but Inside Soap spoilers for Pat's funeral: Friday 13th January-40 Minute episode Quote:
At Pat’s funeral, Kat reaches out to help Jack as he tends to his son’s grave.
I hope there isn't going to be a Jack/Kat affair next.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1420 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,127
|
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...-on-panel.html
i would mind Sam being like a guest judge or covering for Amanda but i dont want her to be a full time judge tho ![]() Its looking like she is gonna be on the panel but its still only speculation
|
|
|
|
|
#1421 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 116
|
Quote:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...-on-panel.html
i would mind Sam being like a guest judge or covering for Amanda but i dont want her to be a full time judge tho ![]() Its looking like she is gonna be on the panel but its still only speculation ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#1422 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,127
|
Quoted from a Paulo Szot Interview
![]() He adds: “The ensemble is wonderful - the guys have great energy and the girls are beautiful of course. And then there is Sam. It’s a great achievement for me as an artist to share the stage with her, because she is just amazing and has become a great friend." Working with Womack, who plays Nellie, has been particularly important in helping Szot discover new aspects of the show. “We worked through the scenes we have together and I discovered many new things,” he explains. “We have added good things to it, I believe. It was an enchanting process. And I am pleased that we are still running it and discovering things and I think we will never stop.” |
|
|
|
|
#1423 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,127
|
Just thought I would say that Jill Armour,Cameron Jack,Daniel Koek and his husband are all spending Xmas at Sam and Marks
|
|
|
|
|
#1424 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 816
|
Quote:
Just thought I would say that Jill Armour,Cameron Jack,Daniel Koek and his husband are all spending Xmas at Sam and Marks
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#1425 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,127
|
Quote:
How do you know Hun ?
'Wish I was driving home for Christmas, will miss my family this year! Just as well I got @dankoek @rentathug rick and sam! #Xmasatthewomacks' And she has stayed over at Sams before as well (I follow all the SP cast and they mention Sam quite a lot)
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:06.







