Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Sam Womack aka Ronnie Branning on this morning


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 28-01-2013, 12:20
CherryRose
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: #SexyCharlieCotton<3
Posts: 8,884

Now! I wonder if she'll be asked about Eastenders
CherryRose is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 28-01-2013, 12:28
CherryRose
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: #SexyCharlieCotton<3
Posts: 8,884
Not one question about Eastenders, even though in the intro VT there were lots of Ronnie Branning clips.

Strange..........
CherryRose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 12:45
The_abbott
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ronnie's bed
Posts: 18,146
Strange.......... :
Yes she was in that show too

I doubt Sam wants to associate with the show at the moment considering its rubbish right now.

ANd its Ronnie Mitchell again now. She dumped Jack remember
The_abbott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 12:52
Hit Em Up Style
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Cell Block H
Posts: 11,682
Sam was very vocal about how she quit because the baby swap was in her words ''implausible'' and left her completely mentally drained, so she probably asked not to be asked about it again.
Hit Em Up Style is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 13:15
Joe_Zel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 16,361
She spoke quite a lot about Eastenders when she was on the show last time promoting a musical with Alex Ferns. I wouldn't think there was a need to badger her about it again.
Joe_Zel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 13:29
CherryRose
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: #SexyCharlieCotton<3
Posts: 8,884
Yes she was in that show too

I doubt Sam wants to associate with the show at the moment considering its rubbish right now.


ANd its Ronnie Mitchell again now. She dumped Jack remember
As when they introduced her the VT's that they showed were mainly of her as Ronnie, I thought they might have asked the one question soap fans want to know after the speculation that there has been lately.

A good interviewer would have asked unless they were requested not to.
CherryRose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 13:30
The_abbott
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ronnie's bed
Posts: 18,146
As when they introduced her the VT's that they showed were mainly of her as Ronnie, I thought they might have asked the one question soap fans want to know after the speculation that there has been lately.

A good interviewer would have asked unless they were requested not to.
It was itv - maybe the didn't want to promote a BBC one show.
The_abbott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 13:33
CherryRose
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: #SexyCharlieCotton<3
Posts: 8,884
It was itv - maybe the didn't want to promote a BBC one show.
Maybe.
CherryRose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 13:48
Joe_Zel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 16,361
What's the one question soap fans want to know?

Whether she's returning? Well, clearly she's not. There hasn't been rumours that's just DS imagination.
Joe_Zel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 16:23
Guido9
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,171
Sam was very vocal about how she quit because the baby swap was in her words ''implausible'' and left her completely mentally drained, so she probably asked not to be asked about it again.
She nearly walked from EE for good before then too, so I heard from some in the know - after vehemently disagreeing with the decision to kill off Danielle as that saga came to a close!
Guido9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 16:29
maurice45
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Quahog
Posts: 28,145
Sam was very vocal about how she quit because the baby swap was in her words ''implausible'' and left her completely mentally drained, so she probably asked not to be asked about it again.
Agreed. That storyline was the ultimate Soap pisstake, and I don't think the upset that Sam Womack was caused because of it should be brought up.

I mean, in addition to the storyline itself taking its toll, there are some idiots out there who can't tell fact from fiction and go about harrassing actors/actresses for their characters' actions.
maurice45 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 16:34
T.K. Mazin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 14,767
I felt sorry for Sam Womack, they turned Ronnie into a baby-snatching depressed drone by the end. Don't blame her for quitting.
T.K. Mazin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 16:59
*TribeSpirit*
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,763
I felt sorry for Sam Womack, they turned Ronnie into a baby-snatching depressed drone by the end. Don't blame her for quitting.
The whole thing got out of control. Apparently some idiots started harassing her in the streets cos they thought she was Ronnie. Some people clearly need help.

Can't believe BK completely destroyed Ronnie for Kat.
*TribeSpirit* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 17:01
InsideSoap
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Summer Bay
Posts: 5,803
I doubt Sam wants to associate with the show at the moment considering its rubbish right now.
Because it was so fantastic when she was in it.
InsideSoap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 17:06
T.K. Mazin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 14,767
The whole thing got out of control. Apparently some idiots started harassing her in the streets cos they thought she was Ronnie. Some people clearly need help.

Can't believe BK completely destroyed Ronnie for Kat.
Morons. Why do so many members of the public suffer to understand the difference between reality and fiction? I honestly don't get it .

I heard the actress who played Cindy Beale got harassed on the Tube as well by some drunk teenage chavs. A sad statement of our society. Soap actors getting harassed for merely doing their jobs.
T.K. Mazin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 17:25
*TribeSpirit*
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,763
Morons. Why do so many members of the public suffer to understand the difference between reality and fiction? I honestly don't get it .

I heard the actress who played Cindy Beale got harassed on the Tube as well by some drunk teenage chavs. A sad statement of our society. Soap actors getting harassed for merely doing their jobs.
Its very sad. Stories like these always remind me of the episode in Friends where Joey gets a stalker Never thought it'll happen for real though
*TribeSpirit* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 17:30
Broken_Arrow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,753
Killing Danielle in the very same episode Ronnie discovered the truth may have been shocking but it rendered the entire storyline worthless. All those episodes of Danielle moping around only for her to die minutes after the truth came out was supremely stupid and done for shock value. It was a turning point for EastEnders really. Story over character development. That was bad enough but then the baby swap came along and not only jumped the shark but did a backflip over it. The character of Ronnie has a lot to answer for. Not Sam Womack's fault of course. She was great when she first joined.
Broken_Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2013, 17:40
T.K. Mazin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 14,767
Its very sad. Stories like these always remind me of the episode in Friends where Joey gets a stalker Never thought it'll happen for real though
Lol oh yeah, I remember that episode .
T.K. Mazin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 29-01-2013, 01:13
Guido9
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,171
Killing Danielle in the very same episode Ronnie discovered the truth may have been shocking but it rendered the entire storyline worthless. All those episodes of Danielle moping around only for her to die minutes after the truth came out was supremely stupid and done for shock value. It was a turning point for EastEnders really. Story over character development. That was bad enough but then the baby swap came along and not only jumped the shark but did a backflip over it. The character of Ronnie has a lot to answer for. Not Sam Womack's fault of course. She was great when she first joined.
True enough in many regards. Nobody could've suffered or realistically coped with the amount of fictitious tragedy that Ronnie had bestowed upon her in the space of three short years, well not in the real world. Not even some of the world's most unfortunate beings would lose a daughter (Danielle) for good at the hands of a car doing 20 mph moments after discovering she was her actual mother all along - and then go on to have a miscarriage after that and then suffer a cot death.....! Although probably overlooked by many, I also think the whole dynamic of writing for EE definitely changed after Danielle was killed off.
Guido9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-01-2013, 01:31
Broken_Arrow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,753
True enough in many regards. Nobody could've suffered or realistically coped with the amount of fictitious tragedy that Ronnie had bestowed upon her in the space of three short years, well not in the real world. Not even some of the world's most destitute would lose a daughter (Danielle) for good at the hands of a car doing 20 mph moments after discovering she was her actual mother all along - and then go on to have a miscarriage after that and then suffer a cot death.....! Although probably overlooked by many, I also think the whole dynamic of writing for EE definitely changed after Danielle was killed off.
I completely agree. I don't think there would've been many long term fans who would have expected all those months of build up with Danielle to amount to nothing in the way of a pay off. I don't think (although I could be wrong) EastEnders had ever pulled a stunt like that before where they built something up for so long only to squash it as it reached the climax. Danielle's death I didn't have a problem with. A couple of months down the line when we'd seen mother and daughter reunited and the bond had been built would have been fine. Her death moments after the revelation robbed us of what we were used to up that point. The characters became secondary to the stories and we're still seeing that today. Ronnie was one of the biggest casualties of that method of storytelling.
Broken_Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-01-2013, 01:33
Joe_Zel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 16,361
I don't think it was the death of Danielle that was the problem, and I don't think Womack had a particular issue with that. It was the climax to her biggest plotline since she'd started on the show.

It was the subsequent two miscarriages, Archie's murder, baby swap that just took it way too far.

I remember watching Revealed where they said the story they were going for was the mental breakdown of Ronnie, rather than giving her a reunion with her daughter. Saying that dangling the carrot in front of her and snatching it away was always more interesting to them than having Danielle alive.

I actually agree in some ways, Ronnie and Danielle being reunited would have been fine for a while but then what?
Joe_Zel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-01-2013, 01:49
harrypalmer
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Les Pays-Bas
Posts: 269
It was unfortunate that her stint coincided with Kirkwood's. Her and Roxy were introduced as archetypal fun-loving girls and they made her into a depressed ghost, it must have been a miserable job for the last few months.

One of EE problems recently has been dragging out stories that have no real interest value while leaving dozens of cast members literally doing nothing. It's very boring.
harrypalmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-01-2013, 02:04
Guido9
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,171
I completely agree. I don't think there would've been many long term fans who would have expected all those months of build up with Danielle to amount to nothing in the way of a pay off. I don't think (although I could be wrong) EastEnders had ever pulled a stunt like that before where they built something up for so long only to squash it as it reached the climax. Danielle's death I didn't have a problem with. A couple of months down the line when we'd seen mother and daughter reunited and the bond had been built would have been fine. Her death moments after the revelation robbed us of what we were used to up that point. The characters became secondary to the stories and we're still seeing that today. Ronnie was one of the biggest casualties of that method of storytelling.
Yes, that's more or less what I was getting at re the story writing and with them playing out in terms of Ronnie being the guinea pig victim of that mode of "storytelling", as you accurately put it.

For me the Ronnie-Danielle storyline was a first of it's kind, as up to that point in 2009, nothing had had such an ending as that which had shocked me, not throughout any of the previous 24 years of me watching EE in the way that s/line's sudden climax did - especially after all the long, intricate build up and mixed emotional accompanyment with it all to boot where you really felt for both the characters throughout the whole saga. I suppose there was an ounce of truth in that it would've had the potential to become boring had they both been properly reunited and lived happily ever after - but look at the crap Ronnie wouldn't have had to endure had Danielle lived.....and us as viewers! That has been argued time and again on this forum in the intervening years at various points of course! For me the R&D story was the biggest attempt at shock/sensationalism in EE history up to that point as I said and then after that it became the craze from there on, with character development sacrificed in the name of sensationalism I guess.

Although we'd already had "Who Shot Phil?" in the 90s, then came a more sensationalist and dragged out "Who Killed Archie?", Bradley's jump and subsequent death (in the live ep. in 2010 I think?), the Vic Fire, the Masoods/Fox B&B fire the Christmas before last and so on. I'm just saying it from a personal viewpoint here in some ways really but the Danielle ending paved the way for a tiresome influx of shock value climaxes to follow......
Guido9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-01-2013, 02:06
Guido9
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,171
It was unfortunate that her stint coincided with Kirkwood's. Her and Roxy were introduced as archetypal fun-loving girls and they made her into a depressed ghost, it must have been a miserable job for the last few months.

One of EE problems recently has been dragging out stories that have no real interest value while leaving dozens of cast members literally doing nothing. It's very boring.
Very true. Kirkwood's era all but destroyed her, albeit continuing on with something which Santer had more than started to do himself with her of course - and with a rather more fun loving character he'd created in the first place no less! A strange one all around really! The less said about the most recent storylines you're probably referring to though........the better!
Guido9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-01-2013, 02:19
Broken_Arrow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,753
Yes, that's more or less what I was getting at re the story writing and with them playing out in terms of Ronnie being the guinea pig victim of that mode of "storytelling", as you accurately put it.

For me the Ronnie-Danielle storyline was a first of it's kind, as up to that point in 2009, nothing had had such an ending as that which had shocked me, not throughout any of the previous 24 years of me watching EE in the way that s/line's sudden climax did - especially after all the long, intricate build up and mixed emotional accompanyment with it all to boot where you really felt for both the characters throughout the whole saga. I suppose there was an ounce of truth in that it would've had the potential to become boring had they both been properly reunited and lived happily ever after - but look at the crap Ronnie wouldn't have had to endure had Danielle lived.....and us as viewers! That has been argued time and again on this forum in the intervening years at various points of course! For me the R&D story was the biggest attempt at shock/sensationalism in EE history up to that point as I said and then after that it became the craze from there on, with character development sacrificed in the name of sensationalism I guess.

Although we'd already had "Who Shot Phil?" in the 90s, then came a more sensationalist and dragged out "Who Killed Archie?", Bradley's jump and subsequent death (in the live ep. in 2010 I think?), the Vic Fire, the Masoods/Fox B&B fire the Christmas before last and so on. I'm just saying it from a personal viewpoint here in some ways really but the Danielle ending paved the way for a tiresome influx of shock value climaxes to follow......
Absolutely. We'd had sensationalism before the Danielle storyline. But from that pont on the gloves came off and now anything goes. I don't mind sensationalism as long as there's the kitchen sink element to go with it. But Ronnie ended up becoming a bad joke in the end. She was a great character completely ruined by shock twists and implausibility. From Danielle's death onwards EastEnders became less realistic than it had been previously. In the past there would be suspensions of belief required at times, but now it's required at all times because absolutely anything can happen. Established continuity and characterisation doesn't matter anymore it seems.
Broken_Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:52.