DS Forums

 
 

EASTENDERS. Beyond a joke now!!


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 20-01-2012, 20:15
Monster101
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,786

how can anyone who calls themselves life long fans of eastenders still defend this show??
its absolutly ridiculous now.
and FFS bring back the old LUCY!! who the hell is this blonde imposter, the amount of recasts over the past 3 years is an absolute joke.
they are alienating the audience as every episode passes.

i will be the first to say that 'pats death' episode was brilliant, but these good episodes are few and far between.

the final nail in the coffin has to be
Spoiler


how has it come to this??
Monster101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 20-01-2012, 20:18
The Mad Joker
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: sociopathic island
Posts: 5,236
how can anyone who calls themselves life long fans of eastenders still defend this show??
its absolutly ridiculous now.
and FFS bring back the old LUCY!! who the hell is this blonde imposter, the amount of recasts over the past 3 years is an absolute joke.
they are alienating the audience as every episode passes.

i will be the first to say that 'pats death' episode was brilliant, but these good episodes are few and far between.

the final nail in the coffin has to be
Spoiler


how has it come to this??
lol 3 recast thats hardly anything ur acting like 18 people were recast
The Mad Joker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:18
Hungry Hippo!
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 579
I think EastEnders has been much worse than it is now and I like new Lucy. The new producer is doing good.

Plus is Ben
Spoiler
Hungry Hippo! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:19
glasgow67
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,555
Ben Mitchell has went from being very camp and like a little girl to nothing at all like that but is gay now in about 18 months or less.
glasgow67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:21
big dan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,257
New Lucy is actually growing on me a bit, she seems like she has potential to develop her into a good adult character.
big dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:22
The Mad Joker
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: sociopathic island
Posts: 5,236
Ben Mitchell has went from being very camp and like a little girl to nothing at all like that but is gay now in about 18 months or less.
he also got abused by stella and went to prison where something bad might of happened he also feels neglected by phil
The Mad Joker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:25
ArcticJayH
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 645
Bryna kirkwood HAS to go in order for Eastenders to get better.

Sure they get good rating but that means jack shit to me.
ArcticJayH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:26
Monster101
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,786
lol 3 recast thats hardly anything ur acting like 18 people were recast
sam mitchell
ben mitchell
lauren branning
lucy beale

4.
dont even get me started on daniella westbrooke being allowed back to play sam !!!!
talk about shitting all over kim metcalfs character development
Monster101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:30
QueenShebaVIII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,380
After watching tonight's episode, I don't see how anyone can take it seriously anymore.
QueenShebaVIII is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:31
Jaymitch1
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 6,189
After watching tonight's episode, I don't see how anyone can take it seriously anymore.
i was about to post the same thing.

bloody awful tonight, WHAT THE HELL have they done to Bens character!?
please please kirkwood just sod off!
Jaymitch1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:33
Breadstix
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,252
Ben Mitchell has went from being very camp and like a little girl to nothing at all like that but is gay now in about 18 months or less.
To be fair, Eastenders never gets the timescales right but that's because it's continuation drama and if they continued everythiing in real time, people would either forget or switch off.
Breadstix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:34
friendlyguy2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,418
The show was doomed from the moment Kirkwood was appointed executive producer. Split personality psycho characters like Warren Fox may well work in Hollyoaks but it's a mistake to introduce them into a mainstream soap like Eastenders.
friendlyguy2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:34
dan2008
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 35,274
sam mitchell
ben mitchell
lauren branning
lucy beale

4.
dont even get me started on daniella westbrooke being allowed back to play sam !!!!
talk about shitting all over kim metcalfs character development
It was SANTER that bought Daniella back as Sam

The show has been much worse imo 2004,2005,2006,1997,1993 just for starters. Im enjoying it right now and like all the recasts (Not made my mind up on Lucy yet)
dan2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:37
DODS11
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,768
sam mitchell
ben mitchell
lauren branning
lucy beale

4.
dont even get me started on daniella westbrooke being allowed back to play sam !!!!
talk about shitting all over kim metcalfs character development
Kim was a recast and it worked. I honestly didn't think people really cared about recasts in soaps, sure if it was a 6 part series it might jar but it isn't and very soon nobody will care.
DODS11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:40
miles19740
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 13,768
how can anyone who calls themselves life long fans of eastenders still defend this show??
its absolutly ridiculous now.
and FFS bring back the old LUCY!! who the hell is this blonde imposter, the amount of recasts over the past 3 years is an absolute joke.
they are alienating the audience as every episode passes.

i will be the first to say that 'pats death' episode was brilliant, but these good episodes are few and far between.

the final nail in the coffin has to be
Spoiler


how has it come to this??
So would you say that my constructive criticisms of EastEnders during the last two years are justified?

Was 'Pat's Death' really brilliant? It was ok, but there were to many distractions...Bianca/Ricky/Mandy for starters. It should have focused on Pat only and lasted half an hour.
miles19740 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:44
mandead88
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,176
Yeah, D.W. is terrible. She also looks terrible.
mandead88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:46
dan2008
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 35,274
Yeah, D.W. is terrible. She also looks terrible.
Who cares what she looks like?
I noticed the Fact that People are blaming Kirkwood for her comeback when it was Santer and his Teams idea and they confirmed that on the BBC 3 special
dan2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:48
Hungry Hippo!
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 579
What I don't get is how Marsden can arrest Phil for Stella's murder on the say so of Ben when the CCTV showed she jumped and Phil was cleared of any wrong doing by experts who studied the footage.

They can't just take the word of one person. No way would that get taken to trial. Its more likely to result in a case of harrassment with Phil actually taking Marsden to court instead!
Hungry Hippo! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:50
dan2008
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 35,274
What I don't get is how Marsden can arrest Phil for Stella's murder on the say so of Ben when the CCTV showed she jumped and Phil was cleared of any wrong doing by experts who studied the footage.

They can't just take the word of one person. No way would that get taken to trial. Its more likely to result in a case of harrassment with Phil actually taking Marsden to court instead!
Spoiler
dan2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 20:58
miles19740
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 13,768
i was about to post the same thing.

bloody awful tonight, WHAT THE HELL have they done to Bens character!?
please please kirkwood just sod off!
Hey, just say it as it is ay! No messing with you.

For me, Eastenders has been in trouble for years now. Killing off 'essentials' was a bad idea - Kathy and Cindy - for a start.

I don't like the re-casts either.
miles19740 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 21:00
dan2008
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 35,274
Cut an episode and make a load of people redundant in the process. EastEnders is a main driver of employment for the BBC from actors to production staff and earns a lot of money for the BBC in terms of overseas sales as well as revenue from media promotion etc...

There's a real lack of commercial awareness from people on here!
Exactly and not to mention its cheaper to make 4 episodes of EastEnders than 3 which is what the BBC has stated a number of times.
In EastEnders they have the set,the cast,the crew and they manage to fill 4X30min slots and Given EastEnders is one of the most popular shows on TV it pays off
dan2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 21:03
friendlyguy2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,418
There's no way the CPS would take this to court given that in August 2007 the other detective who questioned Phil in the station with another officer present told him that they knew he hadn't pushed Stella event though Phil confessed to it.

How does Marsden know what Ben claims Phil said to Stella is true? Ben wasn't even there he wasn't a witness. Even if there's no sound on the cctv footage Ben's statement is just without credibility four and half years down the line. Anyway even if Phil did tell Stella there's no way a jury will find him guilty of murder on that basis. Even manslaughter would be 50/50 at best.

Marsden is just desperate for anything to try and nail Phil when in reality they have nothing on him. This is just a twisted sub plot to Ben's supposed ongoing troubles connected with Phil and Kathy's past, Ben's sexuality issues and the fact that he wants to get one over on Phil.

It won't go to court and in time any charges will be dropped. Pointless few spisodes Eastenders because twisted stuff like this only works in Chester with nightclubs and people who have genuine vendettas against each other built up over time. Ben doesn't have a vendetta he's just mixed up and this storyline by Kirkwood is a massive mistake.
friendlyguy2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 21:10
miles19740
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 13,768
Cut an episode and make a load of people redundant in the process. EastEnders is a main driver of employment for the BBC from actors to production staff and earns a lot of money for the BBC in terms of overseas sales as well as revenue from media promotion etc...

There's a real lack of commercial awareness from people on here!
People are being paid hefty amounts, but the quality isn't there is it. Something needs to be done. You don't just go on paying people loads just to 'go through the motions' and churn out 'mediocre' material like sausage meat. The production can't sustain four episodes, so a reduction across the board is necessary. Reduce the show to two episodes a week as it used to be (Tuesday and Thursday)...quality will then increase. Lose half the cast to.

To those who will fight against a reduction, would you if quality improved? Two good episodes a week is better than four sub-standard episodes a week surely.
miles19740 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 21:12
ScreamingTree<3
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,638
I think EastEnders has been much worse than it is now and I like new Lucy. The new producer is doing good.

Plus is Ben
Spoiler
I had a feeling when i read about her marrying that poor guy from the farm or wherever he's from that her days were numbered, showbiz is fickle like that.
ScreamingTree<3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2012, 21:21
bumpandgrind
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: London Town
Posts: 8,791
People are being paid hefty amounts, but the quality isn't there is it. Something needs to be done. You don't just go on paying people loads just to 'go through the motions' and churn out 'mediocre' material like sausage meat. The production can't sustain four episodes, so a reduction across the board is necessary. Reduce the show to two episodes a week as it used to be (Tuesday and Thursday)...quality will then increase. Lose half the cast to.

To those who will fight against a reduction, would you if quality improved? Two good episodes a week is better than four sub-standard episodes a week surely.
That makes no sense. You're suggesting they cut production in half during a recession. The beeb would be slaughtered if they went with your suggestion.
bumpandgrind is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:22.