DS Forums

 
 

EE Jim Branning's relatonship with his children


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-04-2015, 00:10
NoughtiesMusic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: North of England
Posts: 14,124

So Carol reminded Max in tonight's episode that Jim wasn't always a lovely and sweet man as he used to bully them and (at one time) was a racist. All of which was off screen. But by the time he settled onto the Square, he had changed his ways and Dot's influence probably helped a lot.

Was this the same with the other Branning kids? When Derek, April and Suzy were on TV, did they comment on this in the past?

Also, was it ever explained why Jack was his favourite son? I remember during the height of his feud with Max, he'd be taunted as "golden boy".
NoughtiesMusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 11-04-2015, 00:16
Fallon9
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 806
I think Jack stole some kind of military medal of Jim's and Max was blamed for it when they were little boys

Also Max had a black best mate as a teenager and Jim was angry and put him Max the coffin to punish him.

Those are the two incidents which stick out to me.

Also I believe Jim was proud of Jack becoming a police officer.
Fallon9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 00:26
firefly_irl
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,746
Whats weird is how this show always has these dreadful fathers who did their terrible deed pre-show off camera. Did nobody have a happy childhood off screen or did they all have dreadful fathers and mothers.

I don't oppose it but I think its overused.
firefly_irl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 01:10
LHolmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,021
We also saw Jim being racist on-screen at April's wedding in 1996.

Carol, April and Max all had difficult relationships with their dad.
LHolmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 01:14
JackCalvert
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2
For years we were lead to believe it was Jim that put max in the coffin but it eventually turned out to be Derek right?
JackCalvert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 01:18
kitkat1971
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
So Carol reminded Max in tonight's episode that Jim wasn't always a lovely and sweet man as he used to bully them and (at one time) was a racist. All of which was off screen. But by the time he settled onto the Square, he had changed his ways and Dot's influence probably helped a lot.

Was this the same with the other Branning kids? When Derek, April and Suzy were on TV, did they comment on this in the past?

Also, was it ever explained why Jack was his favourite son? I remember during the height of his feud with Max, he'd be taunted as "golden boy".
It wasn't all off screen. The Jackson back story, including Carol's dad being racist was established as soon as they appeared. We then saw him in racist action the first time he appeared at April's aborted wedding which became Carol and alans. He was distinctly off with Alan through all of it and refused to stay for the ceremony. It was covered again in 2006 when Max arrived and we learnt they were estranged and why - Jim having locked Max in a coffin when he was a child because he had a black school friend.

April also talked about Jim objecting to her marrying a Greek man.

Derek didn't mention it much but then he shared his Racist views.
kitkat1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 01:19
kitkat1971
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
For years we were lead to believe it was Jim that put max in the coffin but it eventually turned out to be Derek right?
It turned out to have been Derek's idea but Jim still went along with it.
kitkat1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 04:24
dd68
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Posts: 16,810
I think the portrayal of Jim as dreadful will be followed by the non appearance of April, Suzy and Jack at the funeral.
dd68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 13:29
kitkat1971
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
I think the portrayal of Jim as dreadful will be followed by the non appearance of April, Suzy and Jack at the funeral.
Yes, it's possible they'have done this partly to remind people that he wasn't always cuddly to explain the kids absences. But to be honest I think it would have come up anyway with Carol and Max. As i've just said on another thread, ironically the two left to make the arrangements are the two that had the most difficult relationships with Jim.

However, Jack and Suzy have both been portrayed as veru insular and selfish in the past so them not showing up is no surprise to me. If they've got something else on, i can imagine them both going "well he's dead now, he won't know will he. He'd want me to get on with my own life". Neither of them bothered much with him the last few years in the Home (Dot said that nobody went to see him, even when Jack was still in Walford) so why should it be any different for his funeral? April wasn't meant to be close to him either and lives abroad so again, believable she wouldn't return.

I can see some might see it as not a fitting tribute for John but his children not showing is actually right for Jim, as the character was presented when he first arrived and what we've been told of how he raised his children.
kitkat1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 15:37
Dr K Noisewater
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,729
In the 1996 wedding episodes Jim was absolutely vile to all three of his daughters, Carol in particular however April and Suzy (or Sue as she was then know) were shown to hate/fear him just as much as Carol. He got on very well with Derek but that was because Derek was just as nasty as him. At this point Max and Jack didn't exist but 10 years later when Max was 'created' in 2006 it was established straight away that he and Jim didn't get on and that Jim had bullied him just as he had done the girls. Sadly we never got to see Jim onscreen with Jack (I believe they only ever had one scene together in December 2008 and this was after John bardon's stroke so he didn't have any dialogue). So Jim and Jack's relationship remains ambiguous however it was mentioned by Max that Jack was his favourite but that could just be Max's opinion. If they were so close how come Jack never once visited his father in the 8 years he lived in Walford prior to his arrival?
Dr K Noisewater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 15:50
Steph_Cuckow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 528
I actually don't care what happened before Jim turned into an amazing man who obviously realised his past views were actually wrong by having Patrick as a best friend you could tell he loved his grandchildren and Dot and frankly everyone has the power to change. R.I.P Jim and John
Steph_Cuckow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 15:51
shrinkingviolet
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,233
I like that they haven't sugar-coated the character - I liked what Dot said to Sonia last night 'we had the best of him' and that's true.

I loved Jim in his later years and his friendship with Patrick, but it doesn't erase the fact that he was a terribly cruel father and an awful human being for a large part of his life and I like that they're addressing that. It makes it feel real.
shrinkingviolet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 17:36
kitkat1971
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
In the 1996 wedding episodes Jim was absolutely vile to all three of his daughters, Carol in particular however April and Suzy (or Sue as she was then know) were shown to hate/fear him just as much as Carol. He got on very well with Derek but that was because Derek was just as nasty as him. At this point Max and Jack didn't exist but 10 years later when Max was 'created' in 2006 it was established straight away that he and Jim didn't get on and that Jim had bullied him just as he had done the girls. Sadly we never got to see Jim onscreen with Jack (I believe they only ever had one scene together in December 2008 and this was after John bardon's stroke so he didn't have any dialogue). So Jim and Jack's relationship remains ambiguous however it was mentioned by Max that Jack was his favourite but that could just be Max's opinion. If they were so close how come Jack never once visited his father in the 8 years he lived in Walford prior to his arrival?
Because Jack was a vary selfish man and it seems to be very much 'out of sight, out of mind' with him. Look at how obsessive he would be about some kids yet doesn't even mention the ones who are abroad.

I think it has been mentioned by other people that Jack was Jim's favourite, including Dot last night. I think it is probably because he was the 'baby' of the family and 'made good' by joining the Police.

It is a shame that they never got to explore their relationship on screen - it really detracted from proper character development for Jack aside from anything else. I do think that Jim probably had a somewhat 'rose tinted' perception of Jack whereas he was all too ready to believe the worst of all the others - particularly Max.
kitkat1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 17:40
kitkat1971
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
I actually don't care what happened before Jim turned into an amazing man who obviously realised his past views were actually wrong by having Patrick as a best friend you could tell he loved his grandchildren and Dot and frankly everyone has the power to change. R.I.P Jim and John
You might not but don't you think his children that suffered through it would?

Carol and Max did both forgive him to a certain extent, recognised that he had changed and were gracious enough to form a relationship with him (and allow him to gget to know his grandchildren) during his twiight years rather than holding a grudge. that doesn't mean they have to forget and ignore the years when he was horrible. They aren't planning on badmouthing him to all and sundry. Carol just finds it hard to have to deal with people only talking about one side, the sweet, cuddly side when there was more to him. I understand that and if she can't talk to her brother who knows what it was like too, who can she talk to?
kitkat1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 17:43
kitkat1971
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
I like that they haven't sugar-coated the character - I liked what Dot said to Sonia last night 'we had the best of him' and that's true.

I loved Jim in his later years and his friendship with Patrick, but it doesn't erase the fact that he was a terribly cruel father and an awful human being for a large part of his life and I like that they're addressing that. It makes it feel real.
Completely agree with all of this post.

It shows how intelligent and empathetic Dot actually is that she knows and accepts that her and Sonia's experience and relationship with him was very different to most other people's - especially his children.
kitkat1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 18:39
Lady Voldemort
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: here
Posts: 4,814
This is the parallel story of Jim and Stan's deaths. Both dreadful fathers who had difficult relationships with their children but mellowed with age. Stan got the chance to reconnect with his children. "Nice" Jim's time on the Square was largely a period where none of his children were present so he didn't.
Lady Voldemort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 18:50
kitkat1971
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
This is the parallel story of Jim and Stan's deaths. Both dreadful fathers who had difficult relationships with their children but mellowed with age. Stan got the chance to reconnect with his children. "Nice" Jim's time on the Square was largely a period where none of his children were present so he didn't.
Exactly.

That's why i think they have done the right thing having them die at the same time. The juxtaposition and in some ways unfairness of life (and death) which makes it interesting.

There have still been difficulties with stan and his children, the past has been brought up and he was not sweetness and light. But he has had time to reconnect with Mick and shirley and form a proper relationship with his grandchildren. Had he not known he was dying, he might not have made the effort he has and it was in some ways luck that Mick and Linda bought somewhere big enough that he could stay with them.

Jim didn't know he was going to have a stroke and then spent the last few years unable to effectively communicate with his children and make up for his past mistakes. So, the only ones that really 'knew' him after his Damascus moment are Robbie, Sonia and Bradley. Bradley is dead, robbie on the other side of the World so Sonia is the only one that really knew him in a positive way.
kitkat1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 18:54
marrakech
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 3,824
I really loved that it was Sonia who broke the news to Dot, and it was nice that their previous shared history with Jim was brought up. I found the "we had the best of him" line very moving actually.
marrakech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 19:06
Steph_Cuckow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 528
You might not but don't you think his children that suffered through it would?

Carol and Max did both forgive him to a certain extent, recognised that he had changed and were gracious enough to form a relationship with him (and allow him to gget to know his grandchildren) during his twiight years rather than holding a grudge. that doesn't mean they have to forget and ignore the years when he was horrible. They aren't planning on badmouthing him to all and sundry. Carol just finds it hard to have to deal with people only talking about one side, the sweet, cuddly side when there was more to him. I understand that and if she can't talk to her brother who knows what it was like too, who can she talk to?
No I did nt mean it sound like no one else cared I am just a little shocked that EE has not given John the credit he deserves by having this as just about him without chucking a Carter in it as much as I love Stan.

That's the part I don't get about it being Carol as she always seemed to be visiting Jim where as Max n the others did nt very often. I thought she had forgiven and moved on.
Steph_Cuckow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 19:15
kitkat1971
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
No I did nt mean it sound like no one else cared I am just a little shocked that EE has not given John the credit he deserves by having this as just about him without chucking a Carter in it as much as I love Stan.

That's the part I don't get about it being Carol as she always seemed to be visiting Jim where as Max n the others did nt very often. I thought she had forgiven and moved on.
I think she had forgiven but not forgotten and whilst he was alive she did just see a sick, old man who needed some consideration, not reprimands. There was no point of going over it all again and again as he was beyond talking it out. It was perhaps more duty than anything else. Plus i think she did it as much for Dot as for her Dad.

Now he's gone, and her sense of duty means she will do all the practical things, collect his clothes, contact undertakers etc but she resents being expected to do it all on her own (quite right too when she has 4 siblings) and she is worried that she will have loads of people just going on about what a wonderful man he was when she has different memories. But i don't believe she would ever go into that with anybody other than her close family but having to just show the 'loving, dutiful daughter' to the World is a strain.

ETA. I do understand what you (and others) mean about it being more of a tribute to John if it had been dedicated to just Jim but I do think it is very effective and moving to compare and contrast them this way and surely producing the best quality they can is the best tribute of all? I prefer to have a good episode which accurately reflects on what Jim was like for all his life, not just the cuddly few years we saw with Dot than the farce which was Betty be retrospectively revealed as the Rovers owner in Corrie a few years ago. That was so obviously meant as the ultimate tribute but actually undermined the character (and whole shows) history to me.
kitkat1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 19:33
joe gillott
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Master of all fit EE males
Posts: 6,526
We also saw Jim being racist on-screen at April's wedding in 1996.

Carol, April and Max all had difficult relationships with their dad.
I didn't know april also had her issues with Jim? what's that story?
joe gillott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 19:52
kitkat1971
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23,466
I didn't know april also had her issues with Jim? what's that story?
That she was engaged to a Greek man and Jim wasn't happy about it because he is racist.

She also probably has the same bad memories of growing up with his mistreating their mother and ruling the house with an iron hand that Max described in 2006 and Carol last night.
kitkat1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 19:53
NoughtiesMusic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: North of England
Posts: 14,124
By the time he changed, not only was Patrick his best mate, his grandson is still (as far as we know) with Nita Mistry who used to work at the Minute Mart. She was around in 2001-03 and I don't ever recall Jim protesting that Robbie was seeing an Indian girl. Their storyline was mainly about her struggling to commit because she had a son from previous marriage.

Interestingly there's scope for a future Branning character introduction. I remember it was mentioned that Robbie had a child with Nita in 2009 or 10. Wonder if they'll ever bring him or her in. Would be the first Branning with partial Indian heritage.
NoughtiesMusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 20:43
cobis
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,539
Having now watched Friday's episode I can see why they have placed Jim and Stan's deaths side by side, the similarities are so obvious, difficult relationship with children, cherished and successful relationship with grandchildren who adore them, unhappy first marriages and then finding someone to spend the later years with (I think had he lived Cora and Stan would have had a great marriage - full of fun and laughter)

and despite not always being tactful or wise, sometimes coming out with exactly the right thing to say, I remember the awkwardness of Jim when Jamie was dying, he so wanted to comfort Sonia but didn't know what to say or do, I think he brought snacks to the hospital and offered them to Phil and Peggy

I wonder if their storylines had crossed, would they have been friends or enemies? neither seemed to be the type of man who had friends and yet both gravitated towards Patrick a similar flawed but redeemed in old age character!
cobis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2015, 20:44
Nefersitra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 728
Carol rowed with Jim when Billie died (after his stroke, before he went into the home) and bought up the racism issue again because she said Jim had no photos of Billie. Dot threw her out because she said when they'd asked, Carol had refused to give them any.

Jim is supposed to have married his first wife, Reenie, because she was pregnant wth April after having Derek out of wedlock; they weren't happy and Jim apparently drank heavily. When things got really bad, Reenie would get pregnant to keep the marriage together - Carol, Suzy Max and Jack were basically bandage babies. This didn't give the children the best home life and Max and Jack appear to have been encouraged to fight for Jim's approval.
Nefersitra is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:17.