DS Forums

 
 

DTC wants old Eastenders back...


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 23-07-2015, 23:01
Meg_Beech
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 32

Has anyone else noticed this. DTC is constantly axing new characters e.g. Charlie Cotten and bringing back old characters. Robbie Jackson, Kathy, Sharon, Stacey, Nick, Dean Wicks, Jean I think he wants Eastenders back to how it was when he worked there before. Do you think this is a good thing and will work with how much soaps have changed?
Meg_Beech is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 23-07-2015, 23:06
0...0
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: I like to singy singy singy...
Posts: 17,667
DTC created Charlie and killed off Nick? Sharon's return predates his tenure.

You may have a point with the others. Martin too.
0...0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 01:07
eejm
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,160
Oh, I don't think that's the case. We know Lacey Turner asked to come back rather than EE approaching her about a return. Nick tended to pop up every few years or so, and he was due for another return. Jean and Robbie only came back for very brief stints. Dean's return makes sense as Shirley's family was expanded quite a bit. Martin's now-ex wife and child were already on the Square, and he had family there.


I think the only really surprising return was Kathy, for obvious reasons.
eejm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 01:45
imawotsit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 395
He should bring the Millers back. Demi's daughter must be about 10 or 11 now. Darren's son whose name I forget must be about 6 now. They were always so entertaining. They're the family that got me into EE in the first place.
imawotsit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 01:48
-Batman-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 5,338
He should bring the Millers back. Demi's daughter must be about 10 or 11 now. Darren's son whose name I forget must be about 6 now. They were always so entertaining. They're the family that got me into EE in the first place.
I would rather see The Ferreiras back before The Millers
-Batman- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 01:59
dd68
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Posts: 16,810
You can see the exits coming months ahead due to the lack of screen time
dd68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 02:29
QueenAmy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,547
I think he needs to focus on creating new families, not bringing back old ones for the sake of it
QueenAmy is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 11:01
vald
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
He won't be happy until the show is reduced to the Beales/Fowlers and Mitchell/Watts. The Butchers are gone, the Jacksons are on their way, the Cottons are being decimated and there's not a Moon in sight. We still have a token Slater, but she'll probably be a Fowler before long. His creation, the Carters, will be allowed to stay. The Masoods and Fox/Trumans are token secondary characters.
vald is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 11:07
nick202
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,431
You can see the exits coming months ahead due to the lack of screen time
I think that's DTC's Achilles heel really. Whereas Lorraine Newman would bring characters in and then give them very little to do, Dominic seems to make certain characters very central and then lose interest in them once their storyline has run its course. Effectively the character of Charlie was irreparably damaged by that cliched affair with Roxy
nick202 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 11:10
vald
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
I think that's DTC's Achilles heel really. Whereas Lorraine Newman would bring characters in and then give them very little to do, Dominic seems to make certain characters very central and then lose interest in them once their storyline has run its course. Effectively the character of Charlie was irreparably damaged by that cliched affair with Roxy
And yet other characters down the years have had affairs (often more than one) and survived. And how many killers have we got walking around.
vald is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 11:14
nick202
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,431
And yet other characters down the years have had affairs (often more than one) and survived. And how many killers have we got walking around.
Point taken, but we've seen that storyline before with Roxy and Jack
nick202 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 11:16
elliecat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,707
There was actually no need to kill Nick off, he never stuck around for long anyway. If they needed an excuse for Dot to be away from the square there was always Kirsty/Dotty or Rose she could have gone to stay with. To have Phil get one over on Nick was also an insult to Nick Cotton's character over the years. With Charlie now going, Max going for a while, Jim dead, what family will Dot have left on the Square when she returns.

As for bringing Robbie Jackson back, why? Is Gaffney desperate for work or something? Sonia is the most hideous character on the show at the moment and bringing her back added nothing and has made me want to switch off. I can't stand the sanctimonious cow.

Denise and Patrick are just back ground characters now, and both actors are woefully underused they could act the likes of Sam Janus and Rita Simons out of the park but they aren't Mitchell's. Diane Parish and Rudolph Walker don't need to shout and scream their lines, they don't need to even have any lines to say their expressions in the scenes they do get the point across.
elliecat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 11:18
vald
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
Point taken, but we've seen that storyline before with Roxy and Jack
Then why is Charlie the one being axed. And why are the serial adulterers Phil, Max and Ian still there.
vald is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 11:25
bass55
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 9,412
I'm not particularly bothered about Charlie being axed, but I am annoyed that Lola - a character with buckets of potential - was basically an extra for two years and is now being written out. Killing off Nick Cotton was also a mistake, particularly when there are so few original characters left. Why go to the trouble of resurrecting Kathy when you're simultaneously killing off another legendary character? Is there some sort of 'original character' quota that only allows three to exist at any one time?

Ronnie and Roxy's exit is also LONG overdue. Both characters are finished, especially Ronnie. She should have stayed dead.
bass55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 12:55
Pink_Smurf
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: London
Posts: 6,362
He won't be happy until the show is reduced to the Beales/Fowlers and Mitchell/Watts. The Butchers are gone, the Jacksons are on their way, the Cottons are being decimated and there's not a Moon in sight. We still have a token Slater, but she'll probably be a Fowler before long. His creation, the Carters, will be allowed to stay. The Masoods and Fox/Trumans are token secondary characters.
I agree with you here. The block storytelling where certain characters hog the storylines is annoying. If you're not a Mitchell fan you may as well switch off.
Pink_Smurf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 13:03
bass55
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 9,412
I agree with you here. The block storytelling where certain characters hog the storylines is annoying. If you're not a Mitchell fan you may as well switch off.
The Mitchells are hogging the storylines? If only. This last week has been a breath of fresh air.

How many episodes have Shirley, Dean and Mick appeared in this year? How many weeks have been devoted to Carter dramas at the expense of other families?
bass55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 13:22
bean_of_sb
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: London
Posts: 4,617
Robbie is only coming back to assist in Carol's exit, isn't he? I would much rather that than her do the usual 'go stay with Biance' or 'go and live in Portigal'
bean_of_sb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 13:27
vald
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
The Mitchells are hogging the storylines? If only. This last week has been a breath of fresh air.

How many episodes have Shirley, Dean and Mick appeared in this year? How many weeks have been devoted to Carter dramas at the expense of other families?
Since Christmas we have had:

Ronnie in a coma.
Phil's arrest
Roxy's affair.
Ronnie and Vincent
Phil and Kathy
Peggy's return
Ben losing the Arches
Phil/Max feud
Phil's revenge on Ben
Denny abusing Sharon
Sharon looking for her father with Phil conning her
Vincent blackmailing Phil out of the Albert
Roxy/Dean
Ben/Paul
Ben's arrest
vald is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 13:31
attitude99
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Alcohol aisle in Tescos *gulp*
Posts: 12,043
I'm not particularly bothered about Charlie being axed, but I am annoyed that Lola - a character with buckets of potential - was basically an extra for two years and is now being written out. Killing off Nick Cotton was also a mistake, particularly when there are so few original characters left. Why go to the trouble of resurrecting Kathy when you're simultaneously killing off another legendary character? Is there some sort of 'original character' quota that only allows three to exist at any one time?

Ronnie and Roxy's exit is also LONG overdue. Both characters are finished, especially Ronnie. She should have stayed dead.
I think Nick's death was more playing central to the 30th Anniversary of EastEnders more than anything. Like they had him die in the same spot where he'd committed his first murder nearly 30 years prior. It also help other 'legendary' characters like Dot have a reason to be at the forefront of the show, however I find it weird how Yvonne just upped & left after burning Nicks money & came back for the trial.
attitude99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 14:21
0...0
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: I like to singy singy singy...
Posts: 17,667
Since Christmas we have had:

Ronnie in a coma.
Phil's arrest
Roxy's affair.
Ronnie and Vincent
Phil and Kathy
Peggy's return
Ben losing the Arches
Phil/Max feud
Phil's revenge on Ben
Denny abusing Sharon
Sharon looking for her father with Phil conning her
Vincent blackmailing Phil out of the Albert
Roxy/Dean
Ben/Paul
Ben's arrest
Ahem:
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showt...2039278&page=8
0...0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 15:27
vald
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
Let's wait til the end of the year. Considering that Phil was in prison for the panto season and missing for weeks after he came out I'm not surprised he has appeared less. Then we've had Ronnie away because Sam was working on other things. By the time Shirley takes her autumn break things should even out.

I don't think the Carters are hard done by, but Masood, Tam, Patrick, Vincent and Denise are. IMO he's only interested in the Carters, Mitchells and Beale/Fowlers (including Stacey...the new Mrs Fowler)

Edit: I don't think that reducing the show to three major families is good for the show or the actors and characters.
vald is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 15:31
eejm
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,160
I think Nick's death was more playing central to the 30th Anniversary of EastEnders more than anything. Like they had him die in the same spot where he'd committed his first murder nearly 30 years prior. It also help other 'legendary' characters like Dot have a reason to be at the forefront of the show, however I find it weird how Yvonne just upped & left after burning Nicks money & came back for the trial.
I agree regarding Nick's death. With his lifestyle, it was inevitable he'd meet with a nasty end. I'm surprised he lasted as long as he did, although given the nature of their relationship it's kind of poetic justice that Dot let her son die.

I have a hunch that Declan Bennett's departure was a mutual decision. I think Charlie works well with Dot, but hasn't really jived with either of the Mitchell sisters. Now that Dot is out of the picture for awhile, there just isn't much point to him. I get the feeling Declan Bennett saw this and said he had other things he'd rather do, to which the production team said, "Good, we were running out of ideas for Charlie anyway." He's a character I'd like to see for guest stints here and there (if Declan is interested) after Dot returns.

While I can't say Robbie is a character I missed, I like the idea of Carol doing something a little different. She's been in a funk lately about her life being sort of gloomy and comprised of little more than helping her kids and grandkids. If she were to go live with Bianca, she'd be trading her current situation with more of the same - an overcrowded house of relatives to care for. Yes, I'm sure she'd have the same in India with Robbie, but she's at least staying with the child and grandchildren with whom she's spent the least amount of time *and* India is a chance for a bit of an adventure - much more so than Milton Keynes, anyway.
eejm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 17:13
0...0
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: I like to singy singy singy...
Posts: 17,667
Let's wait til the end of the year. Considering that Phil was in prison for the panto season and missing for weeks after he came out I'm not surprised he has appeared less. Then we've had Ronnie away because Sam was working on other things. By the time Shirley takes her autumn break things should even out.

I don't think the Carters are hard done by, but Masood, Tam, Patrick, Vincent and Denise are. IMO he's only interested in the Carters, Mitchells and Beale/Fowlers (including Stacey...the new Mrs Fowler)

Edit: I don't think that reducing the show to three major families is good for the show or the actors and characters.
I agree but my point was there is no Mitchell domination, its pretty much been Carter domination throughout the last 18 months. Some of those Mitchell plot points you've listed were in the same episode eg Denny hitting Sharon was in one of the few episodes where she was talking about her dad.

We've had endless episodes of Shirley/Mick/Dean as Bass said and there's much more to look forward to with the Roya story.

Vincent has only just arrived and they are slowly building his family up which looks like it will give the Foxes a shot in the arm.

The Masoods do need more to do and I was really disappointed that the Roya story has been mostly about granny Shirley and Dad Dean. I do hope there's a surprise Zainab return looming. That would make me happy.

Clearly EE will never appeal to everyone but I really don't think the problem is endless Mitchells!
0...0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 17:38
vald
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
I agree but my point was there is no Mitchell domination, its pretty much been Carter domination throughout the last 18 months. Some of those Mitchell plot points you've listed were in the same episode eg Denny hitting Sharon was in one of the few episodes where she was talking about her dad.

We've had endless episodes of Shirley/Mick/Dean as Bass said and there's much more to look forward to with the Roya story.

Vincent has only just arrived and they are slowly building his family up which looks like it will give the Foxes a shot in the arm.

The Masoods do need more to do and I was really disappointed that the Roya story has been mostly about granny Shirley and Dad Dean. I do hope there's a surprise Zainab return looming. That would make me happy.

Clearly EE will never appeal to everyone but I really don't think the problem is endless Mitchells!
I think the point the poster was making was that if you're a Mitchell you're far less likely to be axed. Roxy, who's past her cell by date, was just as guilty in the affair with Charlie, yet she survives and Dot's only relative is axed (she can't have much more of her sentence to serve). I love Billy, but is he really a better character than Lola or Aleks, or even AJ. Is Jay more relevant than Liam, the last of our Butchers. Sam Womack has not been committed to the show since her return and yet is valued above Denise, Patrick and Masood who have been there years. The Mitchells do seem to be valued above most other families...Phil deserves to be, but the others...
vald is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2015, 17:43
jamesc_715
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: South West England
Posts: 4,636
I think the point the poster was making was that if you're a Mitchell you're far less likely to be axed. Roxy, who's past her cell by date, was just as guilty in the affair with Charlie, yet she survives and Dot's only relative is axed (she can't have much more of her sentence to serve). I love Billy, but is he really a better character than Lola or Aleks, or even AJ. Is Jay more relevant than Liam, the last of our Butchers. Sam Womack has not been committed to the show since her return and yet is valued above Denise, Patrick and Masood who have been there years. The Mitchells do seem to be valued above most other families...Phil deserves to be, but the others...
I agree with your paragraph but I think the Carters are more valued at the moment. They have dominated the show since their arrival in December 2013. They are quiet at the moment, but I think they will have some big storylines soon. It's a disgrace that Denise is playing second fiddle to Kim because Diane Parish is a better actress than Tameka Empson (in my opinion).
jamesc_715 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:09.