|
||||||||
Sean O'Connor- Ruthless? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: London
Posts: 26,708
|
Sean O'Connor- Ruthless?
How many EastEnders characters will Sean O'Connor axe?
Lee Carter is the sixth character to be axed by O'Connor. Are we heading for an axing bloodbath on the Square? |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,462
|
Quote:
How many EastEnders characters will Sean O'Connor axe?
Lee Carter is the sixth character to be axed by O'Connor. Are we heading for an axing bloodbath on the Square? |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,370
|
Deffo more to come, maybe it frees up the budget for characters and actors he wants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Suck it
Posts: 7,777
|
He's not ruthless. All the characters he's axed were at a dead end either because they'd been through the mill too many times, never clicked into place or were dull. Characters shouldn't be kept just because of their surname or because they're relatively new. It's a tv series not a charity for jobbing actors. It's supposed to be entertaining and those axed so far ceased to be entertaining long ago or never were in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,370
|
Quote:
He's not ruthless. All the characters he's axed were at a dead end either because they'd been through the mill too many times, never clicked into place or were dull. Characters shouldn't be kept just because of their surname or because they're relatively new. It's a tv series not a charity for jobbing actors. It's supposed to be entertaining and those axed so far ceased to be entertaining long ago or never were in the first place.
At least he had the balls to make the sacrifices for the show needed however deep it cuts, the show has to survive and thrive and it can't do that staying in one place. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: London
Posts: 26,708
|
So far I agree with his axing decisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Suck it
Posts: 7,777
|
Quote:
Perhaps he not, although he appears to be because of how many and who but your right he doing he job he was hired for, its obviously sad actors are now effectively unemployed but there is rarely any security in this type of work.
At least he had the balls to make the sacrifices for the show needed however deep it cuts, the show has to survive and thrive and it can't do that staying in one place. The show will survive without Lee standing around looking gormless, Roxy shouting her head off and Ronnie acting like a weirdo. Back in the late 90's one of the EPs axed a load of deadwood in a huge cast cull and replaced them with the likes of Steve Owen, Lisa Fowler and Jamie Mitchell. It's been too long since someone did that. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Winter is coming.
Posts: 13,323
|
Ruthless is exactly what Eastenders needs... Have to remember that the last producer was a lying egotist who just made his own fan fiction for 2 and a half years. There is a lot of work to be done to fix it, and a cast clear out is a good place to start.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 622
|
Quote:
Ruthless is exactly what Eastenders needs... Have to remember that the last producer was a lying egotist who just made his own fan fiction for 2 and a half years. There is a lot of work to be done to fix it, and a cast clear out is a good place to start.
![]() ![]() .I agree dtc was lying so glad he was gone |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,370
|
Quote:
Agreed.
The show will survive without Lee standing around looking gormless, Roxy shouting her head off and Ronnie acting like a weirdo. Back in the late 90's one of the EPs axed a load of deadwood in a huge cast cull and replaced them with the likes of Steve Owen, Lisa Fowler and Jamie Mitchell. It's been too long since someone did that. We've lacked a good bad boy like Steve Owen or Dan Sullivan in a long time. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,021
|
He needs to be careful he doesn't bite off more than he can chew.
When Santer took over EE there was no massive cast cull, he just utilised the cast better then phased out those (Keith & Mickey IIRC) who really needed to go a year into his run. When Kate Oates took over Emmerdale, she didn't axe loads of characters either. Most of her work was style over substance and in particular her last year there wasn't great but one thing she was good at was utilising the cast, even whilst catering to show hoggers like Aaron and Chas. Again, she didn't write out those who needed to go (Ali and Ruby, although personally I didn't mind Ruby and would've kept her over Dan) until she'd been there a while. It's hasty to come in and start waving an axe around without working with a cast for a while first IMO. I mean fair enough he might need space for a few creations of his own but he's getting rid of innocuous characters who could be utilised whilst genuinely aggravating characters remain. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Suck it
Posts: 7,777
|
Quote:
I'm guessing that was Matthew Robinson? someone said SOC worked under him, if they could recreate half that era the show would be on form.
We've lacked a good bad boy like Steve Owen or Dan Sullivan in a long time. If SOC is smart he'll rest Philth for a while. It's really boring how he keeps owning everyone he comes up against. I also think Phil is having a negative impact on Sharon, Ben and Kathy. I'd like to see all three come into their own away from Phil's negativity. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Suck it
Posts: 7,777
|
Quote:
He needs to be careful he doesn't bite off more than he can chew.
When Santer took over EE there was no massive cast cull, he just utilised the cast better then phased out those (Keith & Mickey IIRC) who really needed to go a year into his run. When Kate Oates took over Emmerdale, she didn't axe loads of characters either. Most of her work was style over substance and in particular her last year there wasn't great but one thing she was good at was utilising the cast, even whilst catering to show hoggers like Aaron and Chas. Again, she didn't write out those who needed to go (Ali and Ruby, although personally I didn't mind Ruby and would've kept her over Dan) until she'd been there a while. It's hasty to come in and start waving an axe around without working with a cast for a while first IMO. I mean fair enough he might need space for a few creations of his own but he's getting rid of innocuous characters who could be utilised whilst genuinely aggravating characters remain. I'd argue all of those axed had ample time to get their shit together and if SOC watches the show he's already seen they're not worth holding onto. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 2,473
|
Quote:
We don't know who will remain. SOC could axe 10 more characters by this time next week for all we know.
I'd argue all of those axed had ample time to get their shit together and if SOC watches the show he's already seen they're not worth holding onto. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
|
It's not the axings that count, no one should be exempt. It's what he plans to replace them with. Until I see his signings and what s/l he's got planned I will remain sceptical. It's always easier to tear something down than rebuild.
Three relationships destroyed and he's barely got started (four if you count Tina and Sonia). |
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Team GB
Posts: 539
|
I have a feeling Jay will be next but it should be Shakil. The character is awful.
The only character I would really want to see him axe is Tina. What it looks like to me is that he is cutting down families so they aren't too overcrowded. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,283
|
Quote:
Ruthless is exactly what Eastenders needs... Have to remember that the last producer was a lying egotist who just made his own fan fiction for 2 and a half years. There is a lot of work to be done to fix it, and a cast clear out is a good place to start.
![]() DTC must be seething that the cockers and a carter are gone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,283
|
Quote:
He needs to be careful he doesn't bite off more than he can chew.
When Santer took over EE there was no massive cast cull, he just utilised the cast better then phased out those (Keith & Mickey IIRC) who really needed to go a year into his run. When Kate Oates took over Emmerdale, she didn't axe loads of characters either. Most of her work was style over substance and in particular her last year there wasn't great but one thing she was good at was utilising the cast, even whilst catering to show hoggers like Aaron and Chas. Again, she didn't write out those who needed to go (Ali and Ruby, although personally I didn't mind Ruby and would've kept her over Dan) until she'd been there a while. It's hasty to come in and start waving an axe around without working with a cast for a while first IMO. I mean fair enough he might need space for a few creations of his own but he's getting rid of innocuous characters who could be utilised whilst genuinely aggravating characters remain. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 953
|
Cast clear outs if done right work wonders for the show long term. Look at Robinson, he axed over 20 characters and replaced them with the likes of Steve Owen, Mel Healy, Lisa Fowler - who I think is odds on for a return tbh. Sean worked under both Robinson and Yorke so I think he should be trusted. This guy is old school EastEnders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 9,412
|
The show needs a bit of ruthlessness. DTC axed every character introduced by Kirkwood and replaced them with his own dud characters and pet projects. Sean O Connor is simply axing characters that ran out of mileage years ago. Axing Ronnie and Roxy is the clearest example of this: two characters that haven't been interesting for at least five years, but have stuck around because they're mates with DTC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 200
|
Quote:
Cast clear outs if done right work wonders for the show long term. Look at Robinson, he axed over 20 characters and replaced them with the likes of Steve Owen, Mel Healy, Lisa Fowler - who I think is odds on for a return tbh. Sean worked under both Robinson and Yorke so I think he should be trusted. This guy is old school EastEnders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,461
|
Quote:
The show needs a bit of ruthlessness. DTC axed every character introduced by Kirkwood and replaced them with his own dud characters and pet projects. Sean O Connor is simply axing characters that ran out of mileage years ago. Axing Ronnie and Roxy is the clearest example of this: two characters that haven't been interesting for at least five years, but have stuck around because they're mates with DTC.
But think some behind the scenes departures should be happening also. Alex lamb and the lady who's name Escapes me right now
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,622
|
The problem is he's being ruthless with the wrong characters. The show needs some moral 'tidying up' to get it away from the sensationalist ideas that bogged down DTC's era and back to old-school EE. I thought when we got news that Ronnie was going that this was going to happen, but Lee and Roxy are both (for want a better word) 'normal' people - ie. not murderers and psychopaths - played with conviction by actors who clearly want to be there.
The second on his list should have been Jane, to put that whole nightmare storyline firmly in the past, and the second and third should have been Babe and Claudette. He then should have imposed a year's sabbatical on Phil and Ian to give their characters time to refresh. THAT would have been a bold and ruthless list, but also one that made sense. Finally, he should have kicked Alex Lamb to the kerb and brought in a fresh chief storyliner with brilliant longterm ideas for ALL characters, not just the A-listers. As much as the likes of Tina and Shakil irritate me, I no longer think it's the right decision to get rid of them. I want a show that treats its cast well and does the right thing by them rather than simply axing them because nobody is imaginative enough to come up with some longterm investment. To be honest if the axings of decent, ordinary characters keep happening I can see myself switching off fairly soon. At least Hollyoaks appears to be improving again, thankfully, so I can still get my soap fix there. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: London
Posts: 26,708
|
I wonder how DTC himself feels that his mates Sam and Rita have been axed?
I do see more Carter's going now Lee has been announced - DTC must be annoyed about this! |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: London
Posts: 26,708
|
Quote:
We don't know who will remain. SOC could axe 10 more characters by this time next week for all we know.
I'd argue all of those axed had ample time to get their shit together and if SOC watches the show he's already seen they're not worth holding onto. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:18.





