DS Forums

 
 

John Yorke Quits BBC


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 25-10-2012, 15:14
cobwebsoup
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: England.
Posts: 3,762

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/soaps/s2...quits-bbc.html

Shame. He's done great things for some of the BBC's best shows.
cobwebsoup is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 25-10-2012, 16:30
Markynotts
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,646
Some new blood is needed.

Hopefully with him gone,Eastenders can move forward and get its creativity back.

You only have to look at the state that Casualty and Holby currently find themselves in to see what a mess he has made.

So the question is, did he quit or was he advised to ?
Markynotts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 16:32
Scrabbler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 31,192
We shall probably never know. To be fair he has done some good things for the BBC, but yes it is a very good time for some new blood, things need shaking up a bit.
Scrabbler is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 16:32
Joe_Zel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 17,148
I'd say the state of Eastenders is not his fault.

Eastenders as it has stood the last 2 years was definitely not his vision for the show.
Joe_Zel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 16:40
Scrabbler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 31,192
Yes but he helped appoint those who subsequently ruined it.
Scrabbler is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 16:54
Check it out
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,180
Yes but he helped appoint those who subsequently ruined it.
And surely has the final say on what goes on with the show and its direction.
Check it out is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 17:06
RonSwanson92
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 488
He was the reason behind Daniella Westbrook returning so kind of glad that he is leaving as I think he might have lost his touch since his days as EE exec.
RonSwanson92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 17:11
Doctor Bench
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: London
Posts: 3,298
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/soaps/s2...quits-bbc.html

Shame. He's done great things for some of the BBC's best shows.
Why is it a shame? If anything, he's one of the main reasons for EE's downfall over the years.
Doctor Bench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 17:31
Harlowe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,370
good luck to him and who ever takes over new ideas and creativity never a bad thing.
Harlowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 17:37
T.K. Mazin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 16,468
The writing on Holby City is miles better than EE whatever you think of the current quality, so I wouldn't blame Yorke for EE's current state. How come Yorke is being blamed for this now? I thought everyone was obssesed with blaming Kirkwood for everything? EE will continue to be poor long after Yorke is gone unless they hire good new writers and come up with a fresh, new style of storytelling.
Don't watch Casualty too often so can't comment on that, but I'd say the writing is better than EE as well from what I've seen. In its prime, EE was superior to both shows but not anymore. At the end of the day, it's the EP of EE who has to take the blame for EE's poor quality, but I don't blame Kirkwood as I think EE's problems with quality existed long before he came along. It hasn't been truly consistent and entertaining probably since the early 2000s. Sure, they were some good episodes when Dennis and Sharon were around together in the mid-2000s and when Grant and Den returned, but it wasn't consistent.
T.K. Mazin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 17:42
CherryRose
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: #EE#TheCarters
Posts: 11,310
He has done good things at the BBC but agree it is time for new blood.
CherryRose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 17:48
cobwebsoup
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: England.
Posts: 3,762
Why is it a shame? If anything, he's one of the main reasons for EE's downfall over the years.
He was responsible for some of the best episodes and storylines Eastenders has ever had. How was he responsible for its downfall? Maybe it will be interesting to get some new blood in but John did do a lot of good things for Eastenders, Holby City and Casualty.
cobwebsoup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 17:49
cobwebsoup
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: England.
Posts: 3,762
The writing on Holby City is miles better than EE whatever you think of the current quality, so I wouldn't blame Yorke for EE's current state. How come Yorke is being blamed for this now? I thought everyone was obssesed with blaming Kirkwood for everything? EE will continue to be poor long after Yorke is gone unless they hire good new writers and come up with a fresh, new style of storytelling.
Don't watch Casualty too often so can't comment on that, but I'd say the writing is better than EE as well from what I've seen. In its prime, EE was superior to both shows but not anymore. At the end of the day, it's the EP of EE who has to take the blame. Plus, EE has had problems with quality long before Kirkwood came along. It hasn't been truly consistent and entertaining probably since the early 00's. Sure, they were some good episodes when Den returned, but it wasn't consistent.


Completely agree T.K, especially with the B.I.B.
cobwebsoup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 17:55
davey_wavey
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 23,354
Some new blood is needed.

Hopefully with him gone,Eastenders can move forward and get its creativity back.
I agree. I'm purely speculating here, but I'm thinking one of the reasons Bryan Kirkwood did so poorly at EastEnders is probably because Yorke stifled all of his creative decisions.

Bryan was brilliant on Hollyoaks and he's just returned to work there now, and Hollyoaks has shot up in quality recently - I don't think that's a coincidence. I think Bryan and the other executive producers and writers have more free reign at Hollyoaks as it's on Channel 4, so they can be more ambitious and creative and be allowed to take more risks.

I imagine the EE execs over the past few years (from Louise Berridge onwards) had loads of pressure from the top and had to conform to a certain vision, so they weren't allowed to be so freely creative. Probably because it's on the BBC and as everyone pays a licence fee, they have to play safe.
davey_wavey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 17:56
SMIDSYmk2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,674
Shame on EE he easily was one of the best producers they've ever had, slaters arriving, Who shot Phil, Ethel's death all were fantastic
SMIDSYmk2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 17:58
T.K. Mazin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 16,468
[/b]

Completely agree T.K, especially with the B.I.B.
Thanks, cobwebsoup. I just think people seem to forget EE was poor before Kirkwood came along. It probably became worse under his management, but it would've still been poor regardless of who was in charge. The writers are the problem here to be honest.
T.K. Mazin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 17:59
Lousiana
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,942
Yes but he helped appoint those who subsequently ruined it.
To be fair BK was amazing at Hollyoaks so you can see why Yorke and others (I doubt he made employment decisions alone) thought he might be a good fit for EastEnders.
Lousiana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 18:02
Lousiana
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,942
Some new blood is needed.

Hopefully with him gone,Eastenders can move forward and get its creativity back.

You only have to look at the state that Casualty and Holby currently find themselves in to see what a mess he has made.

So the question is, did he quit or was he advised to ?
I doubt he was pushed out as he is going straight into a new job at a good rank which implies it was his own decision.

He was also responsible for more than EastEnders whilst at the BBC.

I don't buy this 'Yorke stifled BK' rubbish. For one thing Yorke was one of the best EPs EE ever had between 2000-2002 and he also appointed Diederick Santer who had no problems in running the show successfully. Whether you agreed with all of Santer's decisions or not it was a successful era for the show.

The quality of EE also shot up when Yorke returned to the BBC in 2005. 2006 was only so bad because half the cast left and new characters had to be bedded in.

Saying that these past two years have been John Yorke's vision for EE and not Bryan Kirkwood's lets BK off the hook. Funny how the show was not as bad as it is now before BK took over.

If anything the show would've benefitted from John Yorke keeping a closer eye on it - it seems over the past couple of years he has been focusing less on EE and doing other things, most recently running things at The Archers.
Lousiana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 18:02
IzzyInTheHouse
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: England
Posts: 4,133
I agree. I'm purely speculating here, but I'm thinking one of the reasons Bryan Kirkwood did so poorly at EastEnders is probably because Yorke stifled all of his creative decisions.

Bryan was brilliant on Hollyoaks and he's just returned to work there now, and Hollyoaks has shot up in quality recently - I don't think that's a coincidence. I think Bryan and the other executive producers and writers have more free reign at Hollyoaks as it's on Channel 4, so they can be more ambitious and creative and be allowed to take more risks.

I imagine the EE execs over the past few years (from Louise Berridge onwards) had loads of pressure from the top and had to conform to a certain vision, so they weren't allowed to be so freely creative. Probably because it's on the BBC and as everyone pays a licence fee, they have to play safe.
'Play Safe'? Baby swap was playing safe??
IzzyInTheHouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 18:04
T.K. Mazin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 16,468
To be fair BK was amazing at Hollyoaks so you can see why Yorke and others (I doubt he made employment decisions alone) thought he might be a good fit for EastEnders.
Indeed. It's easy to say Yorke made the wrong decision to appoint Kirkwood with the benefit of hindsight. He wasn't to know if Kirkwood was going to be a success or not, but Yorke had good reason to believe he was going to be a big success based on his great work at Hollyoaks as you said. I mean I was one of the people who was excited at Kirkwood's appointment. I thought he would breath new life into the show. But unfortunately, it wasn't to be.
T.K. Mazin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 18:07
dan2008
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 35,274
Fantastic EP for EastEnders in what is of the best Era's for the show. He's done alot of good for EastEnders (and other shows) but it's time to move on and good luck to him.
dan2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 18:09
davey_wavey
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 23,354
'Play Safe'? Baby swap was playing safe??
Well they had to finish the storyline early and cut scenes and replace it with filler stuff, like Poppy and Jodie chatting in the Vic. I imagine Bryan would have played the storyline all the way through the way he intended, if it wasn't for the BBC intervening.
davey_wavey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 18:11
Lousiana
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,942
Well they had to finish the storyline early and cut scenes and replace it with filler stuff, like Poppy and Jodie chatting in the Vic. I imagine Bryan would have played the storyline all the way through the way he intended, if it wasn't for the BBC intervening.
They had no choice but to change the storyline it attracted thousands of complaints and upset a lot of people.

The story should never have been greenlit in the first place. It's hard to tell how much of an effect changing it had on the rest of the year but I thought Ronnie's actual exit week was one of the best of 2011.
Lousiana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 18:12
Check it out
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,180
Well they had to finish the storyline early and cut scenes and replace it with filler stuff, like Poppy and Jodie chatting in the Vic. I imagine Bryan would have played the storyline all the way through the way he intended, if it wasn't for the BBC intervening.
We have absolutely no way of knowing this.
Check it out is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 18:12
cobwebsoup
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: England.
Posts: 3,762
Thanks, cobwebsoup. I just think people seem to forget EE was poor before Kirkwood came along. It probably became worse under his management, but it would've still been poor regardless of who was in charge. The writers are the problem here to be honest.
I'm glad not everyone blames poor Kirkwood for the shows problems Eastenders has had problems ever since 2003. There have been periods where it has improved dramatically (Late 2003 when Den returned, late 2005 with the Phil/Grant/Chrissie and Alfie/Nana storylines, Christmas 2007 with Stacey and Max, a lot of 2009 - 2010 with the Ronnie/Danielle/Archie stuff) but it hasn't been consistent like it was pre-2003.
cobwebsoup is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:20.