DS Forums

 
 

Sean O'Connor is ruining EastEnders


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-11-2016, 01:49
Keibro
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,351
I would have major respect if Sean O'Connor killed Phil Mitchell off.
Having said that, he is the man who by all accounts, has the balls to kill the Mitchell sisters off. I doubt Phil will be following suit.

I've often felt soaps, particularly EastEnders and Coronation Street cling onto characters, based on past glories.

I will say, Steve McFadden is a fantastic actor but I do wonder if one day soon, the writers will hit a wall with his character. If he survives this current story, his next storyline will be his fathering Denise's baby coming out and yet more marriage woes with Sharon.
Keibro is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 08-11-2016, 02:03
SegaGamer
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 19,604
Eastenders has been very enjoyable of late. It's good to get away from the over the top and hard to follow story lines we were getting with DTC.
SegaGamer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 08:59
Ten_Ben
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,465
I would have major respect if Sean O'Connor killed Phil Mitchell off.
Having said that, he is the man who by all accounts, has the balls to kill the Mitchell sisters off. I doubt Phil will be following suit.

I've often felt soaps, particularly EastEnders and Coronation Street cling onto characters, based on past glories.

I will say, Steve McFadden is a fantastic actor but I do wonder if one day soon, the writers will hit a wall with his character. If he survives this current story, his next storyline will be his fathering Denise's baby coming out and yet more marriage woes with Sharon.
There's so much mileage in this, it would be wasteful in the extreme to kill off Phil before the baby is born. If he wasn't there, the implications and ramifications just wouldn't be the same, although I'm not sure what the effects would be on Phil's current will, if he fathered a child he didn't know about. Could Denise contest it?
Ten_Ben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 09:33
LHolmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,021
I would have major respect if Sean O'Connor killed Phil Mitchell off.
It feels wrong to say it but I've been thinking the same. The likes of Ben and Sharon would instantly be given a new lease of life.

Sharon in particular has been ground into the dirt by him. There's little left of the old Sharon. Even when she had a valid point about his will the story had to portray her in a negative light.
LHolmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 09:46
vald
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
There's so much mileage in this, it would be wasteful in the extreme to kill off Phil before the baby is born. If he wasn't there, the implications and ramifications just wouldn't be the same, although I'm not sure what the effects would be on Phil's current will, if he fathered a child he didn't know about. Could Denise contest it?
I hope he never finds out. A five minute drunken mistake doesn't make you a father. Who cares about the money, he's not exactly loaded. He only seems to have a house (mortgaged) and a small garage.
vald is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 09:50
_elly001
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,622
I hope he never finds out. A five minute drunken mistake doesn't make you a father. Who cares about the money, he's not exactly loaded. He only seems to have a house (mortgaged) and a small garage.
He'll find out. I've suspected for some time that he'll be on his death bed, waiting for a new liver and not sure if he'll get it or if the operation will work, Denise will come and tell him because she thinks he's going to die and she wants to get it off her chest, and he'll then make a miraculous recovery and see the baby as his second chance. I'll eat my new woolly hat if it doesn't go something like that.
_elly001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 09:51
Ten_Ben
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,465
I hope he never finds out. A five minute drunken mistake doesn't make you a father. Who cares about the money, he's not exactly loaded. He only seems to have a house (mortgaged) and a small garage.
Would you rather they wait eighteen years before the kid finds out his father was the legendary Phil Mitchell?

Phil might not have much money but most people on the Square seem to think he has.
Ten_Ben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 09:57
Ten_Ben
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,465
He'll find out. I've suspected for some time that he'll be on his death bed, waiting for a new liver and not sure if he'll get it or if the operation will work, Denise will come and tell him because she thinks he's going to die and she wants to get it off her chest, and he'll then make a miraculous recovery and see the baby as his second chance. I'll eat my new woolly hat if it doesn't go something like that.
But will he believe her? Chances are he doesn't remember anything about the night in question. He'll either take to the baby and see it as a second chance like you say, or reject it completely even if DNA evidence proves it's his. There's also the obvious elephant in the room, in that the baby won't be white but I'd hope that EE doesn't make anything of that. Not sure how Phil would react in reality - he already struggles to accept his gay offspring, so.....
Ten_Ben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 09:58
vald
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
He'll find out. I've suspected for some time that he'll be on his death bed, waiting for a new liver and not sure if he'll get it or if the operation will work, Denise will come and tell him because she thinks he's going to die and she wants to get it off her chest, and he'll then make a miraculous recovery and see the baby as his second chance. I'll eat my new woolly hat if it doesn't go something like that.
Oh I hope not. The thought of Phil and Denise bringing up a child together makes me shudder, and an old dog like Phil is not going to change. Could you imagine the trauma of having that face peering down at the poor mite.

Would you rather they wait eighteen years before the kid finds out his father was the legendary Phil Mitchell?



Phil might not have much money but most people on the Square seem to think he has.
18 minimum..... never would be my preference.
vald is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 10:11
LHolmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,021
The Metro are running an interesting piece where Nitin Ganatra (Masood) discusses Sean O'Connor's direction: http://metro.co.uk/2016/11/08/easten...-soap-6233615/
LHolmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 11:07
Superstar99
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,078
The Metro are running an interesting piece where Nitin Ganatra (Masood) discusses Sean O'Connor's direction: http://metro.co.uk/2016/11/08/easten...-soap-6233615/
To me actors who aren't killed off are never going to say anything bad about a producer because they always want to keep the door open to a future return.

However that interview comes across as someone that doesn't really like the direction the new producer is going with but has got to sound respectful.
Saying things like "I wish Sean all the luck for it – I think he is being brave and courageous in doing something new and as an audience we will all adjust and if you’re a true fan you will go with it".

To me that reads that he knows the soap genre has changed, what SOC is doing is taking a huge gamble by going in a different direction with it. I think Nitin is glad to get out now, because I feel a sense that he doesn't want to stick around when the show is at a crossroads in its history. I think they simply don't know what to do with the show as its become stale and worn out and perhaps doesn't have the budget CS and ED do to improve it.

The fact SOC did the archers which is all about dialogue proves why he was chosen as the new producer at EE. They have run out of ideas and because a lot of the characters are tired from given too many storylines over the last few years, they have taken the decision to make the show just a normal everyday portrait of the residents.
Will this work? I doubt it in this day and age, of course as Nitin said a true fan will go with it, but even then this type of direction has a limited shelf life before even the most ardent of fans become bored of it, especially when comparisons will naturally be made against ED and CS.
Superstar99 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 11:14
vald
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
The Metro are running an interesting piece where Nitin Ganatra (Masood) discusses Sean O'Connor's direction: http://metro.co.uk/2016/11/08/easten...-soap-6233615/
Good piece. It seems that the actors are enjoying having more realistic dialogue rather than lurching from one drama to another. He's right that the viewer had become desensitized to the drama and had stopped caring what happened to the characters. Within just a few weeks we've started caring again.
vald is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 12:04
SuperSoaper
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,686
Last night's call centre scenes could have been more interesting, but they just felt flat in the end. The fact is, I'm not enjoying EE any more, and look forward to the more dramatic soaps with their neverending twists like Hollyoaks, Emmerdale, and now even Corrie, which has drastically improved since Kate Oates took over as producer.
SuperSoaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 12:10
bean_of_sb
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: London
Posts: 4,617

However that interview comes across as someone that doesn't really like the direction the new producer is going with but has got to sound respectful.
Saying things like "I wish Sean all the luck for it – I think he is being brave and courageous in doing something new and as an audience we will all adjust and if you’re a true fan you will go with it".
I read it as him being 100% behind the changes!

"I actually prefer it because you get to sit in a story longer and really explore and study it. The danger of doing too many peaks is that you no longer feel anything for anybody anymore. You know, it’s one thing that actors say is that if you cry in every scene, people lose sympathy for you. Pick your moment and really make the audience feel it"

"allow the actors to breathe and allow the characters to build – we will earn that peak rather than just having one after another."

"it’s not necessarily plot driven themes where you only talk about information. There’s more banter and flow in the scene which is lovely as it is more human."

That doesn't sound like someone who doesn't like the new direction...
bean_of_sb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 14:23
Damien_Johnson
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 592
Brilliant interview with Nitin, saying a lot of what we're thinking.

Especially the bits where he said that if you have high drama all the time, you care less about the character. It's better to let the story grow, explore it and then at the climax you will really feel for the character.

God knows how people are reading that as Ganatra slagging the boss off. Think some are in denial about the new direction, the actors are obviously enjoying it and so is the audience.
Damien_Johnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 15:34
Stube
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 15,389
Sensationalism after sensationalism results in what Hollyoaks is now - hyperbole with no real empathy for the characters because it's too unbelievable to imagine them as real people.

Eastenders needed DTC's work (or most of it, rather) after the dull LN era. DTC went a bit OTT in the last year of his reign though so the best direction for the show is what SOC is giving us. He's making us care for, or at least relate to, each character so when the time comes for big storylines, it'll have more of an impact on the audience. Not to mention the contrast between these everyday life scenes we're getting at the moment and future "explosive" storylines.
Stube is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 15:48
Aura101
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 6,576
Brilliant interview with Nitin, saying a lot of what we're thinking.

Especially the bits where he said that if you have high drama all the time, you care less about the character. It's better to let the story grow, explore it and then at the climax you will really feel for the character.

God knows how people are reading that as Ganatra slagging the boss off. Think some are in denial about the new direction, the actors are obviously enjoying it and so is the audience.
More negativity surrounding this era (allbeit early days) then there was at any point during DTC era. I would say the show is dangerously close to alot of people switching off after losing interest altogether.

Sensationalism after sensationalism results in what Hollyoaks is now - hyperbole with no real empathy for the characters because it's too unbelievable to imagine them as real people.

Eastenders needed DTC's work (or most of it, rather) after the dull LN era. DTC went a bit OTT in the last year of his reign though so the best direction for the show is what SOC is giving us. He's making us care for, or at least relate to, each character so when the time comes for big storylines, it'll have more of an impact on the audience. Not to mention the contrast between these everyday life scenes we're getting at the moment and future "explosive" storylines.
I dislike the constant sensationalism, its what pretty much destroyed Hollyoaks.
However for the current Eastenders to work in the fashion its going, it atleast needs engaging and interesting characters of which it has very VERY few.
And some of the characters have turned into right wet blankets, what the hell has happened to Stacey for example.
To be honest the only ones with abit of fire in them are Ronnie and Roxy, and they are being killed off!
If i knew how, i would put a bet down now that the current producers contract is going to be cut short....
Aura101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 16:02
Damien_Johnson
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 592
More negativity surrounding this era (allbeit early days) then there was at any point during DTC era. I would say the show is dangerously close to alot of people switching off after losing interest altogether.
It's not.

The show is at it's highest since early April is pretty much the same as it was 12 months ago.

Again, a few teenagers whingeing on social media doesn't mean 6 million people are going to switch off.
Damien_Johnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 16:06
vald
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
More negativity surrounding this era (allbeit early days) then there was at any point during DTC era. I would say the show is dangerously close to alot of people switching off after losing interest altogether.



I dislike the constant sensationalism, its what pretty much destroyed Hollyoaks.
However for the current Eastenders to work in the fashion its going, it atleast needs engaging and interesting characters of which it has very VERY few.
And some of the characters have turned into right wet blankets, what the hell has happened to Stacey for example.
To be honest the only ones with abit of fire in them are Ronnie and Roxy, and they are being killed off!
If i knew how, i would put a bet down now that the current producers contract is going to be cut short....
Ben seems fiery enough for the lot of them...that lad never stops screaming. As for R&R they're very quiet ATM.
vald is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 16:07
pinkprint
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 281
It's not.

The show is at it's highest since early April is pretty much the same as it was 12 months ago.

Again, a few teenagers whingeing on social media doesn't mean 6 million people are going to switch off.
It would take months and months to see a dip in ratings, how long has the new producers work been onscreen?
I find the show unbearably dull but I am not going to switch it off just yet, there were a couple of occasions I switched off for weeks during Treadwell's time at the show, and that was mainly due to the Carters!

Also i would not say ''a few teenagers'' are whingeing on social media, Facebook has a wide range of people complaining about the current state of the show.
I would prefer to say ''just because a few superfans on digitalspy are lauding the show does not mean 6 million will stay tuned''
pinkprint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 16:13
Adrian_Ward1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Plymouth Devon
Posts: 12,497
I definitely Am enjoying the character lead stuff
Adrian_Ward1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 16:17
Ten_Ben
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,465
I dislike the constant sensationalism, its what pretty much destroyed Hollyoaks.
However for the current Eastenders to work in the fashion its going, it atleast needs engaging and interesting characters of which it has very VERY few.
And some of the characters have turned into right wet blankets, what the hell has happened to Stacey for example.
To be honest the only ones with abit of fire in them are Ronnie and Roxy, and they are being killed off!
If i knew how, i would put a bet down now that the current producers contract is going to be cut short....
BIB 1 - Life! Kids, running a house and trying to make ends meet.

BIB 2 - Not going to happen, I'm afraid. Everyone seems to be assuming that SOC has come in and is careering off with his own vision irrespective of anybody else's views. Like anyone, he's employed to do a job and whether the current direction is one that he sold to his superiors or one that his bosses employed him as the best candidate to see through, it's a joint effort. He's not running riot off his own bat, willy-nilly. One vocal element of the audience moaning on social media and the press being upset because they're not getting spoilers is not going to change anything in the short-term, especially as the audience numbers are holding up well.
Ten_Ben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 16:24
JamieHT
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,287
It's OK at the moment. Certainly not a memorable period so far. I'm sick of all the camera shots zooming out on scenes.
JamieHT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 16:35
Adam_Manneh1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 1,288
To me actors who aren't killed off are never going to say anything bad about a producer because they always want to keep the door open to a future return.

However that interview comes across as someone that doesn't really like the direction the new producer is going with but has got to sound respectful.
Saying things like "I wish Sean all the luck for it – I think he is being brave and courageous in doing something new and as an audience we will all adjust and if you’re a true fan you will go with it".

To me that reads that he knows the soap genre has changed, what SOC is doing is taking a huge gamble by going in a different direction with it. I think Nitin is glad to get out now, because I feel a sense that he doesn't want to stick around when the show is at a crossroads in its history. I think they simply don't know what to do with the show as its become stale and worn out and perhaps doesn't have the budget CS and ED do to improve it.

The fact SOC did the archers which is all about dialogue proves why he was chosen as the new producer at EE. They have run out of ideas and because a lot of the characters are tired from given too many storylines over the last few years, they have taken the decision to make the show just a normal everyday portrait of the residents.
Will this work? I doubt it in this day and age, of course as Nitin said a true fan will go with it, but even then this type of direction has a limited shelf life before even the most ardent of fans become bored of it, especially when comparisons will naturally be made against ED and CS.
You talk so much nonsense and are just scaremongering other users into being on your side about "SOC is ruining EE"
Adam_Manneh1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 16:40
Pippa2012
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 559
The show is just about ok at the moment but some episodes there is nothing happening. I watch alot of the soaps, Eastenders in overall would be my preferred soap but i am struggling with it in parts at the moment as i find its going round in a circle. SOC is not at the helm long enough to make his mark so i will await judgement but he would want to pick the pase up soon. There is nothing going at the moment that makes me feel excited for the Christmas episodes which are usually something i look forward to.

At the moment, the sooner Lee Carter leaves the better as i am finding his scenes extremely depressing which is down to his wooden acting skills.
Pippa2012 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:11.