|
||||||||
I hate wet weekend Shirley!!!!!!! EE |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: #EE#TheCarters
Posts: 11,310
|
I hate wet weekend Shirley!!!!!!! EE
Sorry but Shirley wouldn't take this crap from Phil, she knows him better than anyone!
She'd call his bluff, she'd tell him if he tells Mick and she'll tell Sharon everything!!! What the hell is DTC thinking????? Taking Shirley back to the Berkwood days ffs!!! I don't want wet weekend Shirley!!!!! I want take no dam god shit Shirls!!!!!! As for Dean and Linda - NO NO NO NO NO NO NO ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() I want Dean to kick Phils face in!!!!! Ok rant over!!! |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: I like to singy singy singy...
Posts: 17,667
|
This is how us Sharonistas feel about her one day Phil forgiveness. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: #EE#TheCarters
Posts: 11,310
|
Quote:
This is how us Sharonistas feel about her one day Phil forgiveness. Then again EE think he's the terminator, he'd just sit up and shout i'l be back! I am so sick of Shirley and Sharon been his lap dogs |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: I like to singy singy singy...
Posts: 17,667
|
Quote:
Hopefully she's keep the gun and shoot Phil in the head!
I do agree, the writing for Sharon and Shirley around Phil really diminishes them. I don't give a crap who his true love is. They need to give him a good kicking and walk away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 9,495
|
I really really want to see feisty Shirley back but I also want to see her trying to make things better, for her to realise where she has gone wrong and try to put it right, I love Shirley's banter and sarcasm and I actually enjoy seeing her getting along with her family and the others in the square but they always seem to revert to her drinking and running after Phil.
The Shirley who first joined wouldn't take this crap from Phil and neither would Sharon, I agree that he diminishes them and they need to get as far away from him as possible or team up and take him down. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The Sixth Circle of Hell
Posts: 20,236
|
Its TPTB's totally irrational and disturbing worship of Philth that is to blame.
They both have been totally destroyed. ![]() Why do all the women fight over such a disgusting pig?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 51
|
Quote:
Its TPTB's totally irrational and disturbing worship of Philth that is to blame.
They both have been totally destroyed. ![]() Why do all the women fight over such a disgusting pig? ![]() I just do not understand it. He has zero personality and is hardly god's gift in the looks department either. He's still portrayed as untouchable aswell, which is laughable considering his age!! |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 9,495
|
Quote:
This ^^
I just do not understand it. He has zero personality and is hardly god's gift in the looks department either. He's still portrayed as untouchable aswell, which is laughable considering his age!! |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 4,919
|
Quote:
Its TPTB's totally irrational and disturbing worship of Philth that is to blame.
They both have been totally destroyed. ![]() Why do all the women fight over such a disgusting pig? ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Posts: 16,810
|
I like Shirley, but I wish she was stronger
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Walford/TARDIS
Posts: 8,620
|
Quote:
Its TPTB's totally irrational and disturbing worship of Philth that is to blame.
They both have been totally destroyed. ![]() Why do all the women fight over such a disgusting pig? ![]() I was one of the first pointing out how Phil's characterisation subsumes others... I remember posting about it quite extensively in 07/08/09... I pointed out the problems then and used Shirley as an example. Yes Shirley's character has been completely subsumed by Phil's characterisation so that her character is effectively written with the purpose of serving his. But that was always going to happen. It has not happened to Sharon yet though - or at least has only started too and is very unlikely to go that much further. Sharon's characterisation suffered far more in 2012/13 than now. Rather her character is much better. The only real blip in her characterisation re phil is her reaction to his role in Dennis' death. Now I loved shannis and do believe he was the love of her life (not ghastly grunt). But 6 years had passed; time always dulls pain. It's silly to think she would react guns blazing after being told. Or rather it's silly to believe she would ONLY react that way. Unlike a lot of EE characters, Sharon has a multi-layered personality. IMO it was feasable for the writers to have her react either accepting it or going all watts on Phil's arse. They choose the former - I accept that. Aside from that incident Sharon's character has not really been direct by Phil's. She still stands up to him; doesn't like his involvement in her business. Hell, she even tried to swindle him out of any control!!!! Shirley would never do that. Yes, Sharon's characterisation is still not 100%; and yes I'd prefer her without phil. But it is not the writers preference for Phil's character that is the cause of Sharon's characterisation problems as it is with Shirley's. It's too late for Shirley anyway. If the writers can't independently represent her characterisation without subsuming its direction to Phil's character when she has her extended family newly brought into the show specifically for her then they never will. She will never have any independence as a character. In contrast Sharon's character has improved in leaps and bounds and there is more hope for her now than at anytime since her return. And yes I love the word subsume. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 9,495
|
^ I tend to disagree about it being 'too late' for Shirley, she works brilliantly with her family and is a multi-layered but flawed character with much to explore, I'd like to see Shirley accept responsibility for the past and build proper relationships with her family as her s/l builds this year, while, keeping her witty one-liners and sarcastic nature (which I love). I do want to see 'feisty, funny' Shirley back, instead of 'venomous, Phil pining' Shirley.
Sharon's characterization has been poor over the last couple of years and her relationship with Phil does impact on her moving forward, she has been reduced to being a bitchy character who is disliked by many (not all, but many) which is a shame as she is an iconic character. I think Phil is the common denominator and diminishes both characters, they are both perfectly good independent characters but latching them onto Phil's gravitational pull denies them their full potential imo. Phil's characterization and the writing for Phil changes with each episode and it's quite difficult to keep up, they need to figure out what they are doing with him, Sharon needs to get revenge on him and Shirley needs to be stronger around him. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,362
|
Shirley is a great character but she really needs to stop going after Phil. She is a doormat and I was hoping her family would stop her pining after Phil. I don't know why people still think Phil and Shirley are good for each other when in reality, they are toxic together.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Walford/TARDIS
Posts: 8,620
|
Quote:
^ I tend to disagree about it being 'too late' for Shirley, she works brilliantly with her family and is a multi-layered but flawed character with much to explore, I'd like to see Shirley accept responsibility for the past and build proper relationships with her family as her s/l builds this year, while, keeping her witty one-liners and sarcastic nature (which I love). I do want to see 'feisty, funny' Shirley back, instead of 'venomous, Phil pining' Shirley.
Sharon's characterization has been poor over the last couple of years and her relationship with Phil does impact on her moving forward, she has been reduced to being a bitchy character who is disliked by many (not all, but many) which is a shame as she is an iconic character. I think Phil is the common denominator and diminishes both characters, they are both perfectly good independent characters but latching them onto Phil's gravitational pull denies them their full potential imo. Phil's characterization and the writing for Phil changes with each episode and it's quite difficult to keep up, they need to figure out what they are doing with him, Sharon needs to get revenge on him and Shirley needs to be stronger around him. Firstly, Sharon's tag of being bitchy was largely in response to two things: her parenting storyline and Shirley. The parenting aspect of Sharon has largely been dropped ATM meaning she is only "bitchy" in relation to Shirley - so I ask can a character really be labelled bitchy if it is in relation to just one character? Additionally it is because Shirley continues to sniff around phil that Sharon is bitchy in the first place. Where Shirley an independent character and no longer connected to phil this wouldn't happen at all removing the last vestige of Sharon's bitchiness. What I'm saying here is Sharon's characterisation has vastly improved. An example of this is she is no longer really "bitchy" she is just a bitch to one character. Secondly, my very point was that if the writers cannot conceive of Shirley being an independently centred character when she has had family and characters specifically retconned FOR her, then I think the odds are she never will be. Whilst it may be that u or I can see elements that could create an independent characterisation for her the fact of the matter is that for various reasons (such as what used to be known as "writers economy"; producers vision; etc) Shirley remains firmly tied (down) to phil. That is unlikely to change if it isn't being changed now. Thirdly, although it is true that Phil's characterisation has begun to impact on Sharon IMO that is in relation to the ultimate outcome and the need to build drama. A good example of this was Sharon's reaction to being bashed up, declaring to phil that she had been placing the bar over him and would now prioritise him more. I expect us to see a more submissive Sharon in the immediate future. But IMO this is not because she is being subsumed into Phil's characterisation (as it does with Shirley or did with kate. Lisa), but because the writers want to maximise the drama when Sharon inevitably finds out phil was behind the break-in. It is the standard trick of moving the character in one direction to maximise the dramatic impact when the character inevitably gets re orientated another way. That IMO is now a stock-in-trade dramatic device used in soap now and a good example of story-driven plot rather than character driven plot. It doesn't change the fact that Sharon's characterisation is being led by the story not by phil. Whereas Shirley's characterisation is usually led by phil as the story outcome is defined by phil. In the case of the break-in it is my hope that the story-outcome is led by Sharon! I also do not see much dimension to Shirley's character. It puzzles me that others do. Despite the ENORMOUS amount of effort, resources and backstory given to the character she is fundamentally the same as she was 6 years ago. You could write her characterisation and make scant reference to her children. That is a sign of very poor characterisation. The proof of this is the very fact that she continues as a character to be chiefly defined by phil. Were she as rounded and developed a character as some believe, she would have broken free from Phil's pull. This has not happened, and as I noted, is unlikely too. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
|
Quote:
Shirley is a great character but she really needs to stop going after Phil. She is a doormat and I was hoping her family would stop her pining after Phil. I don't know why people still think Phil and Shirley are good for each other when in reality, they are toxic together.
Shirley has plenty of drama with her own family and they have gone too far in resurrecting her relationship with Phil. I can only think they want Phil to be involved in the Mick/Shirley reveal.
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Walford/TARDIS
Posts: 8,620
|
Quote:
It's ridiculous isn't it. 18 months after she left him she's suddenly acting like a love sick teen, and it's not as if he hasn't been with Sharon on and off for months. It's all hugely engineered to add interest to Phil/Sharon ....lets face it they are a deadly dull couple who seem to spend their lives shopping, shouting at Denny Darling and arguing about their bar.
Shirley has plenty of drama with her own family and they have gone too far in resurrecting her relationship with Phil. I can only think they want Phil to be involved in the Mick/Shirley reveal. ![]() Sry to use Sharon as an example but my recent posts have put her characterisation freshly in mind. The same is not true of Shirley. This is what I mean when I say her character has been subsumed by phil - the chief elements of her characterisation are defined by phil the consequence of which means her representation is dependent on him and her relations to him. I disagreed a lot with mona but she knew this which is why she was so hell bent on phirley. We have seen the most recent example of this in the way she prioritised phil over dean. It will continue because she is effectively an extension of Phil's character now. The family drama u speak simply does not tap into any strong elements of Shirley's characterisation which means the writers either don't wish to or don't feel confident enough to build upon. The reasons why the writers may feel this are varied and I eluded to above (can flesh them out but not too sure if I haven't bored people already). |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 9,495
|
Quote:
It's ridiculous isn't it. 18 months after she left him she's suddenly acting like a love sick teen, and it's not as if he hasn't been with Sharon on and off for months. It's all hugely engineered to add interest to Phil/Sharon ....lets face it they are a deadly dull couple who seem to spend their lives shopping, shouting at Denny Darling and arguing about their bar.
Shirley has plenty of drama with her own family and they have gone too far in resurrecting her relationship with Phil. I can only think they want Phil to be involved in the Mick/Shirley reveal. ![]() I don't know why Phil has to constantly be involved in Shirley and Sharon's stories, it is beyond me tbh. As a couple Phil and Sharon are mind-numbingly dull, they have clearly brought Shirley back in the fold to create more drama but, I wish they wouldn't sacrifice her in the process. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
|
^
I don't agree with you Fillman. Shirley's family dynamics have made Shirley far more interesting and popular. She doesn't need Phil, whatever the writers think. Sharon on the other hand is nothing without Phil, or should I say his money. Last time she returned she had her own money and they managed to cobble together a family for her. There's only so many times they can bring in characters to prop her up. Having her snobbery disappear, her drug addiction forgotten and her son behaving like an angel is all well and good, but the viewers don't forget. Shirley doesn't need Phil in her life anymore -- Sharon does. |
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Walford/TARDIS
Posts: 8,620
|
Quote:
^
I don't agree with you Fillman. Shirley's family dynamics have made Shirley far more interesting and popular. She doesn't need Phil, whatever the writers think. Sharon on the other hand is nothing without Phil, or should I say his money. Last time she returned she had her own money and they managed to cobble together a family for her. There's only so many times they can bring in characters to prop her up. Having her snobbery disappear, her drug addiction forgotten and her son behaving like an angel is all well and good, but the viewers don't forget. Shirley doesn't need Phil in her life anymore -- Sharon does. Try to be at least a tad objective. Btw Shirley has had far more characters brought in to "prop her up" than Sharon. You are being completely unfair and irrational here. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 9,495
|
Objectively: Sharon needs Phil currently, without Phil she has no home, no bar, no money, nothing, whereas Shirley doesn't need him, her family dynamic has made her more popular and interesting, as Vald as said.
Note: I say currently, as I imagine this won't always be the case for Sharon. I believe she will also become more relevant once away from Phil and when she is more integrated into the square. I'm not always a fan of LD's acting but I do like both Sharon and Shirley, so I am unbiased in my views here. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: South West England
Posts: 4,636
|
At the moment, Sharon does need Phil but when they split up, hopefully they will bring in more family for Sharon. Sharon has Dot, Ian, Johnny, Linda, etc but she needs more people to interact. What annoys me is that some viewers see Sharon as "Phil's girlfriend" only. Sharon is one of the biggest characters ever and she really does need to be fixed/sorted out.
Shirley does not need Phil at all but it's obvious that Phil and Shirley will reunite eventually. Shirley is on her way to become iconic in future if she has many scenes with her family. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 9,495
|
Quote:
At the moment, Sharon does need Phil but when they split up, hopefully they will bring in more family for Sharon. Sharon has Dot, Ian, Johnny, Linda, etc but she needs more people to interact. What annoys me is that some viewers see Sharon as "Phil's girlfriend" only. Sharon is one of the biggest characters ever and she really does need to be fixed/sorted out.
Shirley does not need Phil at all but it's obvious that Phil and Shirley will reunite eventually. Shirley is on her way to become iconic in future if she has many scenes with her family.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Walford/TARDIS
Posts: 8,620
|
Quote:
Objectively: Sharon needs Phil currently, without Phil she has no home, no bar, no money, nothing, whereas Shirley doesn't need him, her family dynamic has made her more popular and interesting, as Vald as said.
Note: I say currently, as I imagine this won't always be the case for Sharon. I believe she will also become more relevant once away from Phil and when she is more integrated into the square. I'm not always a fan of LD's acting but I do like both Sharon and Shirley, so I am unbiased in my views here. Additionally if Sharon had heaven and hell moved to make her integrated again I would also point out the inherent lack of confidence the writers must have in her characterisation. As it stands Sharon has had, over the course of 17 years, phil, grant, tom, and Dennis created for her and den and Vicki brought back for her. Shirley, over 7 odd years, has had dean brought back, heather, mick, linda, johnny, stand, and aunt babe created for her. To me that says a hell of a lot about which character has a more complete and fully developed characterisation. The reality cannot be ignored even if you don't like the character. I don't like Shirley anymore but I used to like her. But partly because of what a hollow character she is I got tired of it. Sharon has never been a hollow character - she may become one, but she has never been one. If one doesn't like Sharon it is because of the actress or because of specific elements of her characterisation but not because she has a one-dimensional character. That is simply not the case. Shirley does. That doesn't mean one cannot like her - people au be attracted to what few character traits she possesses, but it doesn't change the fact that she has fundamentally few aspects of a characterisation. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
|
Quote:
Your innate bias is clouding your judgement: u castigate Sharon for having other characters "prop her up" yet laud the addition of Shirley's family for doing that exact thing for Shirley.
Try to be at least a tad objective. Btw Shirley has had far more characters brought in to "prop her up" than Sharon. You are being completely unfair and irrational here. I like Shirley, but not to the exclusion of other characters. There are some as good and others that are better. |
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Walford/TARDIS
Posts: 8,620
|
Quote:
At the moment, Sharon does need Phil but when they split up, hopefully they will bring in more family for Sharon. Sharon has Dot, Ian, Johnny, Linda, etc but she needs more people to interact. What annoys me is that some viewers see Sharon as "Phil's girlfriend" only. Sharon is one of the biggest characters ever and she really does need to be fixed/sorted out.
Shirley does not need Phil at all but it's obvious that Phil and Shirley will reunite eventually. Shirley is on her way to become iconic in future if she has many scenes with her family. Shirley has a snowball's chance in hell and you're fooling if u think otherwise. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:22.




