Well they are also trying to pass of Debbie/Ross as a passionate relationship so its not looking good for straight relationships either..hell at least Robert/Aaron have chemistry.

But surely they stretch themselves more than unemployed actors, regardless of their talent and training?
In principle I agree with you and I'd argue that it's true of many careers, but grim reality gets in the way of ideals for most of us. Those actors who can support themselves (and perhaps families)with varied careers and resist typecasting are few and far between. I quite admire the handful on soaps who don't let their characters become charicatures because it must be extremely hard to always give a decent performance.

I wonder if Linus Roache has the same slightly dismisdsive attitude now he's older and starring in Law &Order?

His 'principles' didn't force him to turn down a Corrie role himself though.

Nicolas Cage...
It. takes a special sort of talent to go from winning an Oscar to making The Wicker Man into a comedy Our Nic really knows how to back a loser.

Edward Woodward on the other hand, THAT was a good performance.


' Talk about damning with faint praise I#m sure lots of actors. regardless of the mediium they work in are aware of their limitations, just like the rest of us. It can't be easy to put in good performances in the 'factory' environment of soaps. It's all very well to look at it from a purely artistic perspective but soaps are not designed to be great works of art. They are mass (and quickly) produced entertainment. I think its a testament to ED's cast and crew that despite this they are capable of producing great quality drama at times.Yes, there's crap too - well name me any actor, producer or director who hasn't done bad work. Judging a soap by the same standards as some of these high concept US dramas or an Oscar winning film is not judging like for like. They're designed to do different things. Yes, in an ideal world the actors should do a range of work, (and that applies to actors coming into soaps too), but that can be a luxury in this. day and age in any line of work.

YeahI like Linus Roache and tbf he is much better than his Dad IMO, but William Roache is in a pretty unique position even for a soap actor in that he's pretty much played the same high profile leading character all of his adult life. You could see that the two might merge, whereas most of ED's cast however long serving are not in this position.

That ladder was ridiculous!!! Was it made out of twiglets?!

How the hell did Paddy get down the thing in the first place? And get the lamb out?

And Andy only had a small pile of logs!

What a load of old PR bibbly bullocks. I know there's a lot of people hanging on for the "romance", but honestly, they're shagging, it's sex, they should just run with it. Way more believable. Ross/Debbie is just selfish shagging as well. Trying to make it what it isn't just makes it look daft.



Yes, but he has a very big chopper.

I'll get me coat ...

That's what you call a powertool

He is in the Vikings now playing the Saxon king Ecbert, he plays it shall we say quite OTT more melo than drama it is hilarious. More than likely earns as much as his dad for a few months work a year

It is just as well that most soap actors characters do merge with their own as there is no time for rehearsal in the factory of soaps these days

intentional hamminess, I would guess- I've never seen the programme. Still, it suggests he's come down off his high horse if he's hamming it up Good for him, I bet he's having a whale of a time

I always find your posts to be very interesting and understanding.

In an interview this week, Sammy Winward, was asked what the difference is between working on Emmerdale and Prey, the new show she's just finished filming on.
Sticking up for soap actors, she said some critics just do not appreciate the crazy workload soap actors are given. They start a day with 12 scenes to do and then are simply told to go and make it work. She thinks they do a great job when considering the circumstances they work under.
That is so different to working on Prey, where they not only have time to rehearse, but also sit and talk about their characters etc. Also, in a soap you often have to act a scene on a spot, whereas in Prey, there's more movement with cameras following the actors.
Apparently, though, once the actual filming starts it is faced paced.

So I would agree with those who say our soapie stars don't get the credit they deserve!

cheers, and same back to you I might add

It's interesting that Sammy raised the point about how they use the cameras. John Michie said in an interview that he struggled with the number of cameras they used in Corrie as compared to one camera following the actor in Holby City.

I will admit to him being not to bad on S&B but of course he was totally overshadowed by at least 4 strong women actors

Actually Danny Miller did quite an interesting interview when he was on Scott and Bailey, comparing the way they work to ED. He said it was nice that on S&B you had the time to do a scene over and over until you got it right, and that there was so much more detail to the writing. On ED they would often have 20 pages to get through in a day, with changes being made until the last minute.

I was actually surprised he came back so soon, he sounded happy to do something different, and it didn't seem like he couldn't find work.

The lack of rehearsal time is a valid excuse but some can put in acceptable performances and some can't. Some are just terrible actors who should not be working in a primetime tv show. There is no excuse for horrific face pulling gurners like the actors who play Dan and Ruby or being so atrociously wooden as the guy who plays Kirin or the bizzare face pulling antics of the lad who played Sean Spencer.

I totally disagree about the performances given by Simm and Glenister.
Glenisters character wasn't a cliché it was a homage to the characters in 70's cop shows like the Sweeney. A less skilled actor could have got it badly wrong and made it naff for modern tv viewers but Glenister nailed it to perferction.

Analysis of the important points about this ep.

Firstly good episode in spite of the ep having the worst characters in it

Any episode Dominated by by The Galloping Gormless Moron, The Bumbling Idiot, Duller than dull Dull Dan and Kerry should be a bad one.

1) Robert has become a great character to watch, downright evil and bad to the bone but great to watch.

2) Why was the Bumbling idiot left alone in the pit in the first place and why didn't andy go in the pit to rescue a lamb rather than paddy.

3) Why didn't the ladder break when Paddy was going in rather than coming out, and why do they have a crap wooden ladder rather than a metal one.

4) This was by any standards Aarons worst acted episode in a very long time, he has forgotten eevn how to cry properly and that is his only unique selling point as an actor if he loses that he has nothing, terrible, awful, dradful, bone crushingly DIRE don't even come near his standarrd of Acting these days, Just Awful.

5) Why does the Gormless Moron have to inset himself into every storyline

6) Dross is good when he is with April.

7) Will Lawrence die soon having not changed his will.

8) Carly is a fun character but very stupid her builder is obviously a cowboy

9) What did Vanessa's dad do

10) Couldnt Amsterdam keep Rodney

11) And will we every see any of this DVD with Tracy

In fairness, I have seen the actors, or more like, their PR, appear to contradict themselves and the general plotpoints at times, downplay things, upplay others (is that even a word? It is now! - AKA 'Chrissie is the most important thing to Robert' - no, Chrissie's money is, Robert is the most important thing to Robert and even the gay men on DS have more interest in her boobs than her husband does). Example 2 paraphrase: 'Aaron is less important to Robert than his wife is and he is just having fun with him' - yeeeassss, well, umm, no, not quite, TV Quick or whatever. He is on one level playing him but he's utterly obsessed with him on another, reserving all his darkest and broody glances for old Bobblehat. And donning the cat and mouse tactics when he could just piss off home and never look at Aaron again.

So ignore the PR and the interviews, they all talk shite and it means nowt.

Listen to Paddy, I say. Always listen to Paddy. Unless you're stuck in a grain silo.

I also must apologise for the above as being virtually nothing to do wth the original question.

Hey ho!

Yes I realise it was deliberately cliched and tongues were firmly in cheeks. I still think that any relatively decent actor could have done it. It was a clever idea, but that doesn't make it a work of genius. LOTS of actors have successfully played pastiches. Sadly Philip Glenister might well end up being typecast when he's also capable of playing believable characters (I loved his performance in Clocking Off).

I'm guessing Gene Hunt wasn't expexted to be an even vaguely realistic character.He WAS a pastiche so very different from a soap character who surely have to reflect some sort of reality? So who's to say that these actors wouldn't be capable of playing such a part? You haven't seen John Sim or Philip Glenister in a soap. They might be great but they could be rubbish! The two are very different types of drama. I think soaps probably don't demand technical brilliance but the better actors are able to sustain and develop believable characters who we see in all sorts of different situations, and they pretty much have to do that on demand. I daresay that they find out pretty quickly that they can't put into play a lot if the stuff they're taught at drama college in that type of situation.

of course it's easy to say 'that wasn't great, anyone competent could do it' but that applies to soap acting. soap producing and most other jobs.

Good analysis Kwynne as always!

Laughed my head off at your analysis of Aaron. Also:

BIB1: Hurray! Ross Love!

BIB2: I flaming well hope not

BIB3: (see above)

Shouldn't the Barton's be getting a visit from health and safety pretty soon? They've had 3 accidents at their farm in the span of a year. Adam nearly chopped Andy's hand off in that machine, then Psycho Mama Barton dropped the pallet of hay on Papa Barton and now Paddy.

Also each month this year at least one character has ended up in the hospital. At this point Emmerdale has more hospital scenes than General Hospital, maybe its time for a spin-off around the Hospital since its featured so much.

I also think Lawrence has something up his sleeve. I don't buy him putting Robert in charge and putting him in his will. Maybe Lawrence knows what Robert has been up to and is planing to fake his death and frame Robert for it.

Sorry if this has been posted before but just found this video and it has to be one of the funniest things I have seen in a long time. Danny Miller showing once again just how good he is (and the rest of the cast providing great backup). And it's all for a great cause.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EB1TgQB0v_Y

Well I think we can safely say, Robert prefers wonga more than willy now.