I am really annoyed about this too. I would have loved to see Ronnie and Grant together now we will probably never see it!

They were well out of sequence. Makes sense now why they filmed Jay being left in the van when Grant and Mark came to the rescue. I remember Harry Reid being interviewed a few weeks ago saying he didn't get to work with Ross much and that they only had a couple of scenes. Obviously when Jay was available to film these scenes Ross Kemp had finished.

This also ties in with Jay's exit. The timing of Ross being on set and the need to put this storyline in coincided with Jay taking a break shortly afterwards so they needed a rushed exit because it wouldn't make sense if Jay was not around for a few weeks because there has been too much of his backstory with the drugs and sex offenders tag to just be off screen without some explaination of where he is. Making it a whole episode where Grant, Courtney, Mark and Jay all left also moved on the storyline with Ben and Phil and brought those two closer together. It looks like a bit of improvised writing at short notice.

I suppose all their exits have left a lot of doors open which is a good thing. I did find Ben offering his Liver to Phil a bit . I have mentioned on other threads it is possible but not in the UK so would need to be done privately at considerable expense - do they have that kind of cash? Also the operation carries a high risk to the donner would a father be prepared to put his son through that???

Philth pulls ten grand out his ass whenever required as we know so cash is no issue

so true

I feel kind of deflated about the show so although the producer comes with good credentials I don't know what to say Mr S!

Hi 0...0 no need to be glum I have found you a top secret upcoming clip to excite

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkplPbd2f60

Thrilling

I do hope that wasnt Phil's elegy for Paul that we didn't see last Friday.

why do you feel deflated?

I do understand your concerns with it, as it has been pretty dire at times recently. I think there is too much energy put into coming up with stories for temporary returnee's rather than any of said returnee's fitting into the story, and for me there is a massive difference. I am not just saying that because of Grunt and my dislike of the character, but it has happened loads over DTC's reign. I wish they would start with stories and organise the necessary characters to fit rather than trying to stroke the ego's of a whole bunch of actor's who don't want to commit to the show for a reasonable time but come in and do a few bits then piss off without the story having a chance to grow. And believe me that is but one complaint I could go on for infinity but I feel you may lack the time and patience for my ramblings

I think the show has been taking the piss for the last few years basically. I don't want to go into a long whinge as thats unfair on what initially seemed like a positive thread but most characters in it have been shallow and plot driven for too long.

Yes, I agree with you. I like Grant as a character but his recent stint was disappointing. But also a lot of characters that have been around for a while have had stories that are disappointing.

I agree that the writing has been sorely disappointing, but there is a definite link to what I have already said with Peggy, Grant, Ryan, Gavin and probably others that don't immediately come to mind, that the stories have been forced to get the actors on the show but at the same time they have no time or intention to commit and that makes it a complete waste of time, why not concentrate on permanent characters that get left on the sidelines for weeks at a time?

Utterly bizarre!!

It's hard to feel excited about the future of the show or even to rustle up a bit of optimism. We've been here so many times before. A new EP, a big return, new characters...it all comes to nothing.😢 Even if I heard that Janine and David were returning I'd still have reservations about how they'd be used.

even permanent characters only stay 2-3 years if we are lucky before leaving.

how are you meant to invest in characters/families when they don't stick around.

Carters are a good example 3 kids all of which will have left within 3 years but the family should be in it for the long haul. yes Johnny is re-cast but he has had very few stories outside of the family.

I agree Lea. I think there is too much done on the spur of the moment for a ratings kick, they give up on actors/characters if they don't immediately come up to standard or become popular, Lee Carter being a prime example and then a family disintegrates after only a few years. Actors, of course, can't be forced to stay but if they were to take a slightly bigger risk and give longer contracts to actors after their initial 3 months or so perhaps, just perhaps they would hang on to a few more.

So far, I agree with SOC's axings.

Masood leaving is a good decision. He ran his course years ago. I'm sad to see Ronnie and Roxy go. They are iconic, but again they're a shadow of their former self.

I'd like to see Tina, Donna, Johnny, Sylvie and Kyle go soon. They're all full and offer nothing. Why was Sylvie even brought back? There is zero logic behind it.

I agree - if you want to do a dementia storyline it helps if we know and love the character before they become ill. Here all we've heard is that she was a terrible mother anyway so we barely care.

The church is a cult Lea in my view. I'm a lapsed catholic and despite all the scandals all the church can bang on about is how homosexuality is unnatural.

And yet in another thread you're saying that you'd like to see them bring in Kyle's sisters. So would you still axe him even if they were to turn up?

I think the problem with axing the majority of these characters is they're easy targets but, given the right attention, they bring a decent balance to the sensationalism that's plagued DTC's era. I agree that Tina is done as a character. They've tried her in lots of different scenarios and she hasn't really clicked in any of them. Sylvie will have a shelf-life unless they want to explore the long-term repercussions of caring for someone with dementia, but the truth is that once she deteriorates to a certain point it would be very unlikely that she would safely be able to carry on living outside of a care facility. So I don't think she'll be around long-term.

I totally disagree about Donna, Kyle and Johnny. I feel that Donna gets a really rough ride on here but she is played by a good actress and for me she is a very believable character. I know a lot of Donna's, in the profession I'm in, and EE have absolutely nailed the brittleness that comes from having people staring at you all the time, and the ongoing challenge to be accepted. It's a real shame they messed up the baby storyline by involving Vincent because actually it would have been a powerful ongoing story to show the struggles of someone with a physical disability having a baby and bringing them up.

Johnny and Kyle are blank slates who can be taken in so many directions. To say that they're done as characters is entirely defeatist. EE needs the likes of Johnny, Kyle and Donna; good people who, when written well, act as a foil to the more dramatic and sensationalist characters. I would be quite angry if any of these three were written out before they were given proper development and purpose.

Yes, an actor like Paul Nicholas is a great coup for EE but if he's going to be acting out a load of crap on screen then far better not to bother. And if the producer is going to hype him as the worst villain ever then he has to deliver on that or keep his mouth shut.

Similarly while I can understand the huge pull of Babs W and Ross Kemp coming back, and there were some good episodes from that I can't say I would be looking back at this stint with any great affection. The whole Mark thing seemed like a pointless damp squib to make Grant's return explosive but it was severely curtailed by actor availability and timing.

That's pretty much it. I bought into this forum's DTC hype. He had a great cast to work with and his ideas looked fresh and new. And some of them were good. But as time wore on they were either character diminshing or the same old cliches reheated and re-served.

Agree 100%
Was one of my favourite scenes for years.

More realism and diversity would be a start.
Seeing Colin back made me realise how good and real/bleak EE used to be lol
I'd like EastEnders to reflect modern day East London.
Multicultural characters that have stories based around them as individuals not just because they are the 'NewJewish family' etc!

Some hotness would be nice too. I miss Andy!! 💪🏼💪🏼💪🏼

Am really looking forward to the new set and the end of the Mitchell era. We loved you but goodbye 👋🏻👋🏻👋🏻

We need more icons. We've lost Pat, Peggy, Grant, Ronnie, Carol, Pauline, Michelle, Bianca, possibly Kat 😥 We need a new beginning with new characters that could become the future EE icons. It's important to have characters that are less prominent. Such as the Hubbards, Kazemi's etc but you need the big characters that carry the show. If we had weeks and weeks of market inspector crap and Donna lusting after Fatboy people would soon switch off. That's what we have in this transitional period between show runners at the moment. It's good that other characters get a fair go but who wants to see these filler plots on a long term basis? 💤💤💤

Also please no more crying scenes for Kathy!!!! lol she doesn't have the acting ability to carry them off! How the other actors don't laugh when she is attempting to act baffels me!

Deadwood be gone lol: 🌲
Lee ✔️
Buster ✔️
Gavin ✔️
Masood✔️
Tina (Possibly just because of lack of stories not acting ability)
Babe (booo hissss she's behind you/Panto villan)
Johnny (Just not Sam Strike)

For a start....

Maybe we need fresh blood in the Vic