|
||||||||
The Archers! |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#4126 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buckingham
Posts: 28,597
|
You mean Helen is gonna need a bigger knife?!
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#4127 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,216
|
Quote:
You mean Helen is gonna need a bigger knife?!
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#4128 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,216
|
Or whichever Game of Thrones badass female character. With less nudity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4129 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 388
|
As far as I am aware Usha Franks still owns Blossom Hill Cottage - as stated on the BBC Archers website. Peggy did live there, as a tenant, until she moved in with Jack Wooley in the Lodge (which she has said she will leave to Helen in her will).
Rob was living as a tenant in Blossom Hill Cottage before he and Helen got together/married. Jess even referred to Heln living in "her home". Does anyone know differently as to this and why people are suggesting that Peggy will sort out Rob and Blossom Hill Cottage? |
|
|
|
|
|
#4130 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mid Wales / Canolbarth Cymru
Posts: 37,555
|
Quote:
As far as I am aware Usha Franks still owns Blossom Hill Cottage - as stated on the BBC Archers website. Peggy did live there, as a tenant, until she moved in with Jack Wooley in the Lodge (which she has said she will leave to Helen in her will).
Rob was living as a tenant in Blossom Hill Cottage before he and Helen got together/married. Jess even referred to Heln living in "her home". Does anyone know differently as to this and why people are suggesting that Peggy will sort out Rob and Blossom Hill Cottage? I used to think this until about a month ago. Perhaps people also think Peggy is a formidable person who holds some status in the village and her treatment of Rob will be influential? |
|
|
|
|
|
#4131 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 82
|
I noticed that on the i-player the one line introduction for next Friday is 'Rob gets a letter'.
Could it be an eviction notice? Justin turning him down? Hmmmm.... |
|
|
|
|
|
#4132 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mid Wales / Canolbarth Cymru
Posts: 37,555
|
Hopefully Charlotte, the childminder, will read the media coverage and run for the hills.
He'd begun his charm offensive on her. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4133 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 82
|
[quote=Welsh-lad;83910974]Hopefully Charlotte, the childminder, will read the media coverage and run for the hills.
If Helen gets custody she'll not be needed, I expect. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4134 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,464
|
[quote=praggs;83911157] Quote:
Hopefully Charlotte, the childminder, will read the media coverage and run for the hills.
If Helen gets custody she'll not be needed, I expect. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4135 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 734
|
Quote:
Perhaps there will be a follow up with one of the jury characters who will reveal how the non-sequitur conclusion was reached?
That was very odd. The Bruce-like juror (Dennis) and Nigel Havers seemed adamant... but one of them must have changed their mind ![]() On the other hand, I'm enjoying my own mental gymnastics as I try to work it out for myself. After all, given only 15 minutes an evening - or the Sunday Ominous option - we're by now surely used to piecing together those parts of the Rob/Helen story which were only ever implied. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4136 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 907
|
Quote:
Perhaps there will be a follow up with one of the jury characters who will reveal how the non-sequitur conclusion was reached?
That was very odd. The Bruce-like juror (Dennis) and Nigel Havers seemed adamant... but one of them must have changed their mind ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#4137 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,524
|
Now at last we've got a verdict, but the saga won't end there, will it? Rob's not going anywhere and there are two children to consider ... cue massive custody battle (yawn).
I've only heard The Archers in tiny bites extremely infrequently (usually if I was ill in bed as a child in the fifties), but my wife has always been a devotee, to the point that she won't answer the phone if The Archers is on! However, this long drawn out domestic abuse storyline has really turned her off the programme, to the point that I don't think she'll ever pick it back up again. If it's done that to her, I can only imagine that there are droves of listeners who have felt similarly alienated and have probably dropped it too. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4138 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mid Wales / Canolbarth Cymru
Posts: 37,555
|
Quote:
On the one hand, maybe I'd like episode with some of the jurors, letting us know who stood up and said 'No' to Havers' attempt to steamroller the jury into a guilty verdict.
. The way Jackie undermined him unremittingly until the tables turned and everyone began listening to her was pretty well crafted. He was impotent and rather isolated at the end. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4139 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mid Wales / Canolbarth Cymru
Posts: 37,555
|
Quote:
Surely the whole point was to make us think Helen was going to be found guilty and then as we all sat there listening for the verdict it came as not guilty so we could all cheer out of our despair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4140 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,216
|
Quote:
I did find that element enjoyable. It started with Nigel Havers being very entitled and business-like, thinking he could rig things the way he wanted.
The way Jackie undermined him unremittingly until the tables turned and everyone began listening to her was pretty well crafted. He was impotent and rather isolated at the end. Which leaves Parveen, Holly, Jackie, Tristan and Lisa as not-guilty-ers and the remaining silent 3 lurkers whose views we never heard. (I'm sorry that I'm giving this daft episode so much thought, but here we are )
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4141 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 16,156
|
Quote:
I did find that element enjoyable. It started with Nigel Havers being very entitled and business-like, thinking he could rig things the way he wanted.
The way Jackie undermined him unremittingly until the tables turned and everyone began listening to her was pretty well crafted. He was impotent and rather isolated at the end. Then when he realises she will not be dearied. He says things like "Well so far love you seem to be in the minority". When Jackie initally said she thought she was not guilty. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4142 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mid Wales / Canolbarth Cymru
Posts: 37,555
|
Quote:
Was he though? Dennis and Blake's Damascene conversions were certainly all off-stage but they'd been with him all the way.
Which leaves Parveen, Holly, Jackie, Tristan and Lisa as not-guilty-ers and the remaining silent 3 lurkers whose views we never heard. (I'm sorry that I'm giving this daft episode so much thought, but here we are )![]() ![]() The tables did gradually turn; Catherine Tate (Lisa?) started off with some outrageously thick views but I thought she began to come around to Jackie's viewpoint as she began reflecting on her own experiences Nigel Havers was pushed more and more back on his heels until he revealed his own very personal reasons for disbelieving Helen (divorce, limited access to his children etc) As you say, perhaps it does not deserve too much analysis as it was, in general, bollocks. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4143 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buckingham
Posts: 28,597
|
Quote:
Was he though? Dennis and Blake's Damascene conversions were certainly all off-stage but they'd been with him all the way
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4144 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,216
|
Quote:
Well done for remembering all their names! I'm still going on the names of the actors
![]() ![]() The tables did gradually turn; Catherine Tate (Lisa?) started off with some outrageously thick views but I thought she began to come around to Jackie's viewpoint as she began reflecting on her own experiences Nigel Havers was pushed more and more back on his heels until he revealed his own very personal reasons for disbelieving Helen (divorce, limited access to his children etc) As you say, perhaps it does not deserve too much analysis as it was, in general, bollocks. Quote:
In some ways Dennis was the worst of the lot not caring if the defendant was guilty or not but prepared to vote whichever way got him out of there soonest.
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4145 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 16,156
|
Quote:
In some ways Dennis was the worst of the lot not caring if the defendant was guilty or not but prepared to vote whichever way got him out of there soonest.
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#4146 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,147
|
[quote=fredster;83911666] Quote:
I wonder if he will try it on with her. Why bring her into the cast for such a short time otherwise? Maybe he will get custody of Henry. She is being played as sounding quite soft and gullible so maybe Rob will go home and turn on the waterworks and she'll believe he's been horribly wronged and wants to stay and help him. There must also be a reason for having so many of the jury from hell originally believing his side of the story, too. Not everyone in the village will believe the verdict, I don't suppose. It could split the village - half will be building a wicker man and the other half preparing a ducking stool. I think I'm going to enjoy the probably slow unfolding of Rob's come uppance a lot more than the coercive abuse part. Although I can envisage Helen driving me nuts if she continues to keep things to herself. Which she has to if the storyline is going to have legs. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4147 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,464
|
Quote:
Now at last we've got a verdict, but the saga won't end there, will it? Rob's not going anywhere and there are two children to consider ... cue massive custody battle (yawn).
I've only heard The Archers in tiny bites extremely infrequently (usually if I was ill in bed as a child in the fifties), but my wife has always been a devotee, to the point that she won't answer the phone if The Archers is on! However, this long drawn out domestic abuse storyline has really turned her off the programme, to the point that I don't think she'll ever pick it back up again. If it's done that to her, I can only imagine that there are droves of listeners who have felt similarly alienated and have probably dropped it too. I just want normal Archers back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4148 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 82
|
Quote:
Was he though? Dennis and Blake's Damascene conversions were certainly all off-stage but they'd been with him all the way.
Which leaves Parveen, Holly, Jackie, Tristan and Lisa as not-guilty-ers and the remaining silent 3 lurkers whose views we never heard. (I'm sorry that I'm giving this daft episode so much thought, but here we are )I liked Parveen, very level-headed. Couldn't believe the islamophobic comments. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4149 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 16,156
|
[quote=cika;83912750] Quote:
I agree she must have some other purpose but I can't see Rob getting custody of Henry in the circumstances. Maybe social services might allow unsupervised access for one or both children if she's also there? That would put the cat among the pigeons. She's qualified, I presume, I wasn't paying a great deal of attention to her introduction? So she will have been CRB checked. It's a bit of a stretch but it's hard to see she was for if she doesn't stay. She is being played as sounding quite soft and gullible so maybe Rob will go home and turn on the waterworks and she'll believe he's been horribly wronged and wants to stay and help him. There must also be a reason for having so many of the jury from hell originally believing his side of the story, too. Not everyone in the village will believe the verdict, I don't suppose. It could split the village - half will be building a wicker man and the other half preparing a ducking stool. I think I'm going to enjoy the probably slow unfolding of Rob's come uppance a lot more than the coercive abuse part. Although I can envisage Helen driving me nuts if she continues to keep things to herself. Which she has to if the storyline is going to have legs. ![]() Rob could of course have absconded with Henry since Friday. Did anyone listen at lunchtime today? Which episode did they broadcast? Did they do both Friday evening and Sunday evening? |
|
|
|
|
|
#4150 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,464
|
[quote=An Thropologist;83913121] Quote:
Either would liven up the Village fete. Both seems like over kill. ![]() Rob could of course have absconded with Henry since Friday. Did anyone listen at lunchtime today? Which episode did they broadcast? Did they do both Friday evening and Sunday evening? |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:11.





)
