|
||||||||
What did Wendy Richard do so wrong at Eastenders |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 11,800
|
What did Wendy Richard do so wrong at Eastenders
Watched the Eastenders Greatest Exits programme, last night which I recorded when it was aired on Watch the other week.
Her exit didn't get a mention, nor was she on any of the clips they showed. We all know she had a pretty crap exit, but what did she do so wrong, surely her letting her feelings known that Pauline should have married Joe after Arthur, wouldn't have upset them that much |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
|
Allegedly it did. They assumed she was bluffing when she said she wouldn't renew her contract if they went ahead with Pauline marrying Joe and she wasn't. So, they punished her by making Pauline really horrible, alone, unloved by her family and giving her an eminently forgettable exit.
It also had the side effect of wasting a decent actor in Ray Brooks and according to his auto biography his time on the show was very unhappy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 896
|
I haven't a clue if Wendy ever did anything 'wrong' as such, but from the outside it does look like that show favours some actors letting them come and go as they please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bridge Street
Posts: 3,085
|
The producers of EastEnders have a history of taking things out on the characters if the actor upsets them. See Tiffany, Cindy, Pauline and Kathy for examples of this.
With Pauline it ended p giving her a dodgy exit - quite right frankly that she wasn't in the 100 Greatest Exists. Such a shame and bitter end for a legendary character. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 36,061
|
Quote:
I haven't a clue if Wendy ever did anything 'wrong' as such, but from the outside it does look like that show favours some actors letting them come and go as they please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Team Moira is not a slag.
Posts: 25,900
|
Quote:
Poor Fat Barry only wanted to do a stint of panto and he got killed off. Now everyone does it.
and yet Pasty & Jo were given breaks.
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,948
|
Quote:
Poor Fat Barry only wanted to do a stint of panto and he got killed off. Now everyone does it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: God didn't do this, devil did
Posts: 28,118
|
Why didn't any of the top bosses get involved and stop the awful treatment she received.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,859
|
I was glad to see the back of Pauline, the miserable old trout.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: God didn't do this, devil did
Posts: 28,118
|
Quote:
I was glad to see the back of Pauline, the miserable old trout.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 381
|
This is where EE goes wrong at times - especially under the wrong producer. Wendy was a real pro, and did the work and stayed true to her character - a decent actress and professional, when she didn't agree with Pauline's direction, the producer and writers really pissed up the character, and it was disgraceful to Wendy......if it was DTC at that time you can guarantee Pauline would have got a proper exit!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Munchkin Land
Posts: 25,724
|
The last months of Pauline and her eventual demise marked a real low point in the history of Eastenders. It was an absolutely appalling way to treat someone who'd been in the show from day one.
Wendy was right in that Pauline would never have remarried. She knew that, everyone knew that, having her shack up with another man showed a complete disregard for the history of the character. It was very lazy writing. I know that no one is bigger than the show, but Wendy knew Pauline better than anyone. The way the powers that be acted showed a shocking level or arrogance. As it was her exit her was badly written drivel, after months of giving her a complete personality transplant they couldn't even be bother to give her a decent send off. Disgusting. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Salford, Manchester
Posts: 1,332
|
She didn't do anything wrong at all (as far as I know). She just decided to quit and the writers made Pauline really unlikeable before her death on Christmas Day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
|
Quote:
Towards the end she did turn into a miserable trout, I was also glad she was gone. However I never knew they made her like this and gave her a crap exit just because she voiced her opinion.
It did seem to fit the timing of Richard's resignation and Pauline becoming quite so vile though. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 6,206
|
Quote:
The producers of EastEnders have a history of taking things out on the characters if the actor upsets them. See Tiffany, Cindy, Pauline and Kathy for examples of this.
With Pauline it ended p giving her a dodgy exit - quite right frankly that she wasn't in the 100 Greatest Exists. Such a shame and bitter end for a legendary character. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
|
I always feel like souting 'Wendy Richards' when you from time to time get posters saying "why does the actor agree to do this plot, they should just say no" when there is a plot they feel is out of character. Actors do not have a right to vetow in their contracts, they can voice their opinions and if the writers are smart they'll listen to their views but really the only sanction they have is to quit. And then the writers can still wrrite whatever they want for their perios of notice and the actor has no choice but to film it - unless they want to risk being sued for breach of contract.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 36,061
|
Quote:
I always feel like souting 'Wendy Richards' when you from time to time get posters saying "why does the actor agree to do this plot, they should just say no" when there is a plot they feel is out of character. Actors do not have a right to vetow in their contracts, they can voice their opinions and if the writers are smart they'll listen to their views but really the only sanction they have is to quit. And then the writers can still wrrite whatever they want for their perios of notice and the actor has no choice but to film it - unless they want to risk being sued for breach of contract.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 594
|
Pauline's exit was hilariously bad. First, she decides to leave Walford having lived there in the same house her entire life; then she just collapses in the Square like a Muslim getting down to pray followed by a diabetic epileptic passing out after too many vodka & Lucozades; then her funeral was interrupted by police as the coffin was about to be incinerated to perform a procedure that would have been done instantly; then Joe confessed to killing her with the rather ironic weapon of the frying pan before falling into, through and out of a window. It really was so stupid, especially for someone that spent a third of her life on the show. I did laugh when she smashed a plate over Joe's head though!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 69,010
|
Quote:
Happened to Pam as well
and yet Pasty & Jo were given breaks.![]() at thatKirwood was in charge when Pam St Clement wanted a break and being the Egotist that he appears to be, decided to vindictively kill her off whereas Jo and Patsy were under Lorraine werent they? Kirkwood seems to take things very personally and must be horrible to work for IMO |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: AndySugden&DeclanMacey
Posts: 45,281
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
|
Quote:
Indeed, it's the same as when people say "Doesn't such and such have any influence on their character" it was said alot during Kat's affair storyline about Jessie, well just look at what happened to Wendy when she went against the writers/producers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
|
Quote:
I thought it was hadn't?
![]() ![]() That reminds me - must remind people of that line in the thread saying EE has only just got funny. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,947
|
Wendy did nothing, she just loved and believed in her character so much that she thought Pauline wouldn't remarry again. Which is understandable. My nan and mum never remarried again, its a tradition that is dying out in this world.
Wendy was saved by John Yorke in 2004 after the producers were gonna axe her. I don't think they thought Wendy was being serious when she said she'd quit. I suspect they thought she'd turn around and say "Yes I'll stay" after the producers let her have a month off in late spring, early summer 2006. Sadly, Wendy wasn't gonna go against her word and left. And tbh I don't blame her, I support Wendy's decision. I do believe Wendy regretted her decision to quit the show as I think she loved it that much. I don't think the producers have been bitter against her, it was just Kate Harewood who had a problem. Maybe John Yorke did try and save her but Wendy still insisted to leave. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 238
|
Wendy was right to speak out about her character getting remarried. Pauline was so traditional and would never have married anyone else after her Arthur passed away. All the long term viewers of EE knew this.
Then the writing for Pauline began to change and she was written totally out of character. She would have never lied about having a brain tumour. Pauline was no liar. She also would have never decided to suddenly live with Michelle in America. She wasn't a sophisticated globe trotter ; she was a family orientated woman whose roots were well and truly based in Walford. In the writers defence they did try to explain some of this by saying Pauline was depressed which explained some of her behaviour but not the points raised above and her general vileness. She wasn't a character who would be nasty with anyone ; there was always a reason. Usually it being to do with her family. If anyone hurt her family the matriarch came out fighting. For this reason I can understand her animosity towards Sonia after her fling with Naomi while she was with Martin. She was protecting her last born son. She would have tried to break them up but not by lying about being ill. Her depression and bitterness is understandable after the life she had. She was a family woman running out of family. They'd either died or moved away. That part of the s/l did ring true that she was desperately trying to cling onto Martin. I believe that Julia Smith had originally always planned for Pauline to turn into a more Lou Beale character as the series progressed. The Daughter becomes her Mother. To a certain degree this had already started to happen ever since Arthur died. However it was a gradual process. The final months rapidly turned Pauline into a villain. Something Lou Beale never was. Opinionated, controlling , difficult but this was balanced with a genuine love for her family. Pauline became very much one note and didn't have any balance to her at the end. Pauline was one of the more reality based characters on the show. She wasn't the most sensational or flashiest character but she was a character who was very plausible. Most people know a Pauline Fowler. I think it's to Wendy's credit that the character is still missed on the show. |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Cell Block H
Posts: 11,878
|
Quote:
I don't think the producers have been bitter against her, it was just Kate Harewood who had a problem. Maybe John Yorke did try and save her but Wendy still insisted to leave.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:45.



and yet Pasty & Jo were given breaks.


