DS Forums

 
 

EastEnders - Have Sharon and Kat had any proper scenes?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-09-2013, 23:43
saintsebastien1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,065

Since Sharon's return, has she had any proper scenes with Kat?

It seems that the producers have yet again completely forgotten about the history between the two characters and back in 2005 Kat hated Sharon because she was the reason Dennis ended it with Zoe.

Also the main thing that links Kat to Sharon is that her daughter Zoe was part of her dad's death (Zoe hit Den first even though she didn't kill him she knew he was dead).

I know it seems random, but I just would've thought they would have more scenes and even become friends?

They got on well on Sharon's wedding day when Kat wished her luck... Some sort of proper scene between the two would be good and a link to the past.
saintsebastien1 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 10-09-2013, 23:48
dazza89
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 13,401
From what I can recall they have had no real conversation! Infact there brief market scene last night was probably only a handful of scenes they have had since Sharon has returned, I don't even think there was any reaction from Kat about Sharon even being back.
dazza89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 23:50
benbenalen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Albert Square
Posts: 10,674
From what I can recall they have had no real conversation! Infact there brief market scene last night was probably only a handful of scenes they have had since Sharon has returned, I don't even think there was any reaction from Kat about Sharon even being back.
Its very silly, its like they havent even met and 2001-2005 didnt even happen!

No mention of Chrissie, Zoe, Sam, Pauline, etc etc,

Big mistake on Newmans side!
benbenalen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 23:58
saintsebastien1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,065
Its very silly, its like they havent even met and 2001-2005 didnt even happen!

No mention of Chrissie, Zoe, Sam, Pauline, etc etc,

Big mistake on Newmans side!

I completely agree! When Sharon returned, there should've been a scene in the Vic whereby Kat is shocked to see she is back. Sharon says she hopes they can be friends and Kat agrees to put the past behind them.

It makes me so angry that they have completely overlooked this. In 2005, Kat lashed out at Sharon and Dennis in the Vic because of what happened to Zoe and said she would drink to them 'clearing off'.

Also, of course the scene they had in the kitchen on Sharon's wedding day, Kat wished her luck and told her to have a good day.
saintsebastien1 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 23:59
saintsebastien1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,065
It would've been natural if Sharon asked Kat what Zoe is up to these days or something or Sharon to ask Phil about Sam...
saintsebastien1 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 00:01
felixrex
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 7,066
No, there was no real acknowledgement of Sharon's return from Kat. After a couple of weeks they said their first words to each other and it was all handled as if nothing had ever happened. A very odd decision by the producers, but that's no surprise these days.
felixrex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 00:45
Otis Hill
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,234
Well if you think with Kat logic then the more severe the offence to her offspring the greater the reward she gives you:
Breaking her daughter's heart and/or causing her to leave the country gets you cool indifference (Sharon)
Swapping her son for a dead child for 3.5 months gets you a cuppa and a bed for the night (Ronnie)
Otis Hill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 00:49
soapnut
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Cannock, Staffordshire
Posts: 3,006
It's all very disjointed nowadays and the writers are entirely at fault, the whole saga has more holes than a teabag.
soapnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 00:52
thejoyof_pat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Team Moira is not a slag.
Posts: 25,900
I completely agree! When Sharon returned, there should've been a scene in the Vic whereby Kat is shocked to see she is back. Sharon says she hopes they can be friends and Kat agrees to put the past behind them.

It makes me so angry that they have completely overlooked this. In 2005, Kat lashed out at Sharon and Dennis in the Vic because of what happened to Zoe and said she would drink to them 'clearing off'.

Also, of course the scene they had in the kitchen on Sharon's wedding day, Kat wished her luck and told her to have a good day.
consider Sharon's current default setting seems to be set to b*tch I doubt a conversation like that would happen. Hell even Sharon still being mad with Kat due to her connection with Zoe would be better than nothing.
thejoyof_pat is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 12:27
Broken_Arrow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Suck it
Posts: 7,777
I think we should prepare ourselves for Sharon's exit. Look at the facts.

- No storylines on the horizon
- Reduced to a glorified extra
- Writers can't get to grips with her characterisation
- All of her stuff was given to Ronnie (Lola, Mitchells, leading lady)
- DTC part of the team who said Ronnie and Sharon can't be on the show at same time
- Letitia looks bored by the material
- Sharon doesn't work as a mother
- Phil and Shirley look set for a reunion
- No interaction with Ian anymore i.e. no friends
- History ignored completely
- No home
- Doesn't seem writers care about Sharon anymore

I hope I'm wrong but the writing seems to be on the wall.
Broken_Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 12:31
thejoyof_pat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Team Moira is not a slag.
Posts: 25,900
I think we should prepare ourselves for Sharon's exit. Look at the facts.

- No storylines on the horizon
- Reduced to a glorified extra
- Writers can't get to grips with her characterisation
- All of her stuff was given to Ronnie (Lola, Mitchells, leading lady)
- DTC part of the team who said Ronnie and Sharon can't be on the show at same time
- Letitia looks bored by the material
- Sharon doesn't work as a mother
- Phil and Shirley look set for a reunion
- No interaction with Ian anymore i.e. no friends
- History ignored completely
- No home
- Doesn't seem writers care about Sharon anymore

I hope I'm wrong but the writing seems to be on the wall.
I agree with you. I'm never really been Sharon's biggest fan or anything but she is better than what she is getting.
thejoyof_pat is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 12:41
saintsebastien1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,065
Sharon doesn't work without a proper family unit behind her. Just look at 2003-2005, she had: Den, Chrissie, Vicki and Dennis.

This time around none of them are in the show anymore and she is just moping around like a bad smell, and acting like a complete snob. Why have they made her in to a snob? If you watch back to episodes of her from 2004-2005 she was a really nice person and helped people out and was polite and kind. Now she looks down her nose at everyone and claims she is always in the right...
saintsebastien1 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 12:45
Broken_Arrow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Suck it
Posts: 7,777
Sharon doesn't work without a proper family unit behind her. Just look at 2003-2005, she had: Den, Chrissie, Vicki and Dennis.

This time around none of them are in the show anymore and she is just moping around like a bad smell, and acting like a complete snob. Why have they made her in to a snob? If you watch back to episodes of her from 2004-2005 she was a really nice person and helped people out and was polite and kind. Now she looks down her nose at everyone and claims she is always in the right...
The character is not Sharon. Not in the slightest.
Broken_Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 12:52
saintsebastien1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,065
The character is not Sharon. Not in the slightest.
What the hell have the writers done to her? You are right, she isn't acting like Sharon. It's so weird, she is still living in the crappy B&B after a whole year of returning and her characterisation has been thrown up in the air and her history has been wiped from her memory.

I know it's not to do with it, but I really hate her new haircuts she has now. She had really nice hairstyles and dress sense in 2004-2005.
saintsebastien1 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 12:57
Broken_Arrow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Suck it
Posts: 7,777
What the hell have the writers done to her? You are right, she isn't acting like Sharon. It's so weird, she is still living in the crappy B&B after a whole year of returning and her characterisation has been thrown up in the air and her history has been wiped from her memory.

I know it's not to do with it, but I really hate her new haircuts she has now. She had really nice hairstyles and dress sense in 2004-2005.
I think they've ruined her deliberately. Call me paranoid but I can't see how any group of writers could be that inept. They've had a year now and what they've done is essentially create a brand new and terrible character for Letitia to play.

I agree about her style. Ever since she cut her hair short back in her first stint she's always looked fashionable. Now she looks out of date and has bad fashion sense. Her extensions look extremely cheap.
Broken_Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 13:06
saintsebastien1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,065
I think they've ruined her deliberately. Call me paranoid but I can't see how any group of writers could be that inept. They've had a year now and what they've done is essentially create a brand new and terrible character for Letitia to play.

I agree about her style. Ever since she cut her hair short back in her first stint she's always looked fashionable. Now she looks out of date and has bad fashion sense. Her extensions look extremely cheap.
I really don't understand why they are doing this to Sharon. Why are they trying to destroy her character?

She was so iconic and interesting in her last stint, but this time round they have just messed it all up and changed her personality. At least a genuine reason for her to change might be plausible but we've had no explanation. The viewers are supposed to accept she has changed and doesn't care about her past anymore.
saintsebastien1 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 13:12
felixrex
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 7,066
Sharon doesn't work without a proper family unit behind her. Just look at 2003-2005, she had: Den, Chrissie, Vicki and Dennis.

This time around none of them are in the show anymore and she is just moping around like a bad smell, and acting like a complete snob. Why have they made her in to a snob? If you watch back to episodes of her from 2004-2005 she was a really nice person and helped people out and was polite and kind. Now she looks down her nose at everyone and claims she is always in the right...
She worked fine without a family behind her from 89-95. The problem is exactly as you say - they've turned her into a completely different woman from the one who we've always known. That's not caused by not having a family behind her; it's caused by a bunch of bad, self-indulgent writers; many of whom are very much part of the Nu-Eastenders generation and really coudn't care less about Sharon.

You can tell as much by the amount of effort they've already put into Ronnie's return and how much more will inevitably follow, compared to Sharon, who got a pretty flimsy return week, has had barely any reference to her past in order to establish her connections to the Square and has had little in the way of a 'storyline' aside from an insipid relationship with Jack and a few pill-popping scenes scattered here and there.

This is Nu-Eastenders and Sharon is a relic they were lumbered with after Kirkwood arranged her return and Newman and the writers weren't interested enough to capitalise on it. I really hope DTC can turn things around for her but, as BrokenArrow says, it's seeming more and more likely that Sharon isn't going to be around very long. I don't think anybody would disagree that they're clearly lining Ronnie up to be the leading lady on the show and Sharon may well have to be sacrificed to make way for that. Perhaps DTC will live up to his comments about Sharon being one of his favourite characters and build her back up and manage to find a balance between between the two; but, again, it wouldn't surprise me if Sharon got thrown under the bus here. And if she leaves on the low of this stint; she won't be back.

What a shame. I never would have believed anybody had they told me a day would come when Bianca, Kat and Sharon would all be on the Square at the same time and I'd hate every one of them.
felixrex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 13:27
soapnut
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Cannock, Staffordshire
Posts: 3,006
I think we should prepare ourselves for Sharon's exit. Look at the facts.

- No storylines on the horizon
- Reduced to a glorified extra
- Writers can't get to grips with her characterisation
- All of her stuff was given to Ronnie (Lola, Mitchells, leading lady)
- DTC part of the team who said Ronnie and Sharon can't be on the show at same time
- Letitia looks bored by the material
- Sharon doesn't work as a mother
- Phil and Shirley look set for a reunion
- No interaction with Ian anymore i.e. no friends
- History ignored completely
- No home
- Doesn't seem writers care about Sharon anymore

I hope I'm wrong but the writing seems to be on the wall.
I agree entirely, it's unforgivable, the producers should hang their heads in shame. I'm sure Letitia would have been more cautious had she known the disaster she was walking into. When is her contract due to end?
soapnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 13:44
The_abbott
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ronnie's bed
Posts: 20,574
She worked fine without a family behind her from 89-95. The problem is exactly as you say - they've turned her into a completely different woman from the one who we've always known. That's not caused by not having a family behind her; it's caused by a bunch of bad, self-indulgent writers; many of whom are very much part of the Nu-Eastenders generation and really coudn't care less about Sharon.

You can tell as much by the amount of effort they've already put into Ronnie's return and how much more will inevitably follow, compared to Sharon, who got a pretty flimsy return week, has had barely any reference to her past in order to establish her connections to the Square and has had little in the way of a 'storyline' aside from an insipid relationship with Jack and a few pill-popping scenes scattered here and there.

This is Nu-Eastenders and Sharon is a relic they were lumbered with after Kirkwood arranged her return and Newman and the writers weren't interested enough to capitalise on it. I really hope DTC can turn things around for her but, as BrokenArrow says, it's seeming more and more likely that Sharon isn't going to be around very long. I don't think anybody would disagree that they're clearly lining Ronnie up to be the leading lady on the show and Sharon may well have to be sacrificed to make way for that. Perhaps DTC will live up to his comments about Sharon being one of his favourite characters and build her back up and manage to find a balance between between the two; but, again, it wouldn't surprise me if Sharon got thrown under the bus here. And if she leaves on the low of this stint; she won't be back.

What a shame. I never would have believed anybody had they told me a day would come when Bianca, Kat and Sharon would all be on the Square at the same time and I'd hate every one of them.
But Ronnie is changing as a character so I don't believe that previous nonsense that they can't be on teh show at the same time. Sharon just needs a purpose (run the Vic/ or her own business - why give Sadie Booty and not Sharon for example?!) and a real friendship (not the fake Tanya one she had to replace Jane).

Ronnie will probably be linked to the Mitchell/Carl/Lola stories but Sharon can still be linked to Ian/Dot/Sadie etc storylines. Why not make her and Denise friends as they have Ian in common for example.
The_abbott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 14:00
felixrex
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 7,066
But Ronnie is changing as a character so I don't believe that previous nonsense that they can't be on teh show at the same time. Sharon just needs a purpose (run the Vic/ or her own business - why give Sadie Booty and not Sharon for example?!) and a real friendship (not the fake Tanya one she had to replace Jane).

Ronnie will probably be linked to the Mitchell/Carl/Lola stories but Sharon can still be linked to Ian/Dot/Sadie etc storylines. Why not make her and Denise friends as they have Ian in common for example.
I completely agree with you; I'm just not sure I have faith in the TPTB to do it anymore. I've never bought the 'Ronnie and Sharon can't co-exist' crap and I hope DTC revises his opinion on that and uses them both to their full potential, but whether he will is a different matter. The show has had a bad track record recently for shamelessly abandoning certain characters in order to indulge their obsession with their chosen-few; I just hope DTC addresses that problem and restores the show to the ensemble piece it once was.

No character has to be ignored to make another work and I'm tired of seeing people thrown under the bus because the writers are too inept to put any effort into more than a select few characters.
felixrex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 14:04
AcerBen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 13,155
You guys are probably right about the writers being at fault when it comes to Sharon, but what would you actually do with her now? I think she's just had her day and maybe they should kill her off.
AcerBen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 14:12
The_abbott
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ronnie's bed
Posts: 20,574
I completely agree with you; I'm just not sure I have faith in the TPTB to do it anymore. I've never bought the 'Ronnie and Sharon can't co-exist' crap and I hope DTC revises his opinion on that and uses them both to their full potential, but whether he will is a different matter. The show has had a bad track record recently for shamelessly abandoning certain characters in order to indulge their obsession with their chosen-few; I just hope DTC addresses that problem and restores the show to the ensemble piece it once was.

No character has to be ignored to make another work and I'm tired of seeing people thrown under the bus because the writers are too inept to put any effort into more than a select few characters.


DTC did favour characters in his first stint as story editor or whatever it was as he clearly loved Ronnie/Roxy, Christian/Syed and Max/Stacey

Some characters will suffer from a new producer but Sharon shouldn't be one of them - less fatboy/lauren/dexter would do me and free up storylines for better characters.

Unfortunately DTC may think:

Lauren = New Stacey
Danny (is that his name? the one that split Chritsan/Syed up)/Jake = the new Christian/Syed

Ronnie/Roxy = the same!

But I think he will have to have an overall view this time around.

Sometimes the storylines are given to the better actors - there is no doubt Stacey, Kat, Ronnie, Max can "hold" a storyline with good acting whereas the likes of Abi, Jay, Poppy, Fatboy, Masood, Billy, Jack don't.
The_abbott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 14:23
dickronson
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,146
Why would Kat be angry with Sharon? As I recall Zoe lied about being pregnant with Dennis baby, in order to stop Sharon and Dennis getting together, then slept with Sharons dad to try and get pregnant (in order to trap Dennis), then aided and covered up her dads murder!

Seems to be Kat would more likely be embarrassed at her daughters selfishness and lies?
I'm sure I remember her being rightly disgusted with Zoe when it all came out, which is why she consequently wished Sharon and Dennis the best.
dickronson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 15:47
Bathsheba
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North East England
Posts: 6,289
I think we should prepare ourselves for Sharon's exit. Look at the facts.


- Phil and Shirley look set for a reunion
Why do you think they are set for a reunion? (I ask this hoping it doesn't awaken the Kraken ).
Bathsheba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 16:06
bass55
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 9,412
Agree with most of the comments here. It is shocking how they've treated Sharon since her return - ignoring her history, turning her into a shallow, spiteful bitch, and giving her no storylines. She actually serves no purpose in the show at all. I didn't even recognise her when she appeared in Monday's episode, I genuinely thought it was an extra until she spoke.

I know EastEnders has made a habit of messing up female returnees of late - Bianca, Kat and Sharon makes it a hat trick. For me, the ruination of Sharon is the clearest indication yet of how little the current writing/production team care about the show's history or its long-term fans. It's almost as if they are ashamed of the show's legacy, and are desperately trying to confine it to the scrap heap.

The reason we haven't had any scenes with Kat and Sharon is because their past interaction doesn't matter to people who started watching after NuEastEnders began in 2006 (the people this show is now aimed at). It's precisely the same reason Sharon has no interaction with Phil or Ian, why she shrugged her shoulders when she learned Pat had died, why Dot seemed to not even care Sharon was back and - the icing on the cake - Sharon had to introduce herself to Janine, a character she had known for over 20 years and even used to babysit.

Like other posters have said, I would not be at all surprised if we are nearing the end of Sharon, and I sincerely doubt we will ever see her again. An utter disgrace.
bass55 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:23.