• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Soaps
Eastenders - Do you think Danny-Boy (Lee) should be given a reprieve?
<<
<
2 of 3
>>
>
Broken_Arrow
19-11-2016
Originally Posted by T.K. Mazin:
“I like your thinking. But how would you get rid of him though?

Maybe Mick watches one of Danny Dyer's movies and shoots his own brains out in pure disgust? ”



I can't think of a more fitting exit
T.K. Mazin
19-11-2016
Originally Posted by priscilla:
“He needs to leave already, annoucing his exit then drawing it out.”

You're only saying that 'cause you want Lee's bum all to yourself. Shame on you, priscilla.

Shame on you for trying to steal away Lee from the rest of the forum .
J-B
19-11-2016
I don't give a shit if he goes, I just hope he doesn't die as I can't take endless weeks of Deeply Stupid Mick, Boring Johnny, and Selfish Linda whinging.
xTonix
19-11-2016
Originally Posted by J-B:
“I don't give a shit if he goes, I just hope he doesn't die as I can't take endless weeks of Deeply Stupid Mick, Boring Johnny, and Selfish Linda whinging.”

J-B you know you love them.
priscilla
19-11-2016
Originally Posted by T.K. Mazin:
“You're only saying that 'cause you want Lee's bum all to yourself. Shame on you, priscilla.

Shame on you for trying to steal away Lee from the rest of the forum .”


His bum just like his acting makes me feel nothing.

As another poster said I hope he doesn't die, simply for the fact I don't want to endure Mick/Linda crying about the past and Johnny trying to act.
Adrian_Ward1
19-11-2016
I would like him to Vanish then reappear several months later .
Subtronix
20-11-2016
I'd keep him and get rid of his girlfriend, she brings nothing to the show at all
nickymonger
20-11-2016
Originally Posted by sorcha_healy27:
“It's annoying when characters become interesting just before they exit. The same happened to Paul.”

Isn't that the point though? You need the audience to like a character to then sympathise in their death or hate them enough you want them dead (villains). Or you need a big "post death/ impact" storyline.

As for the rubbish spouted surrounding characters having run out of stories. All good writers can turn a character around and you should never run out of storylines. It annoys me immensely when that line is used. If you want to axe someone fine. Have the guts to say it's because you want rid etc...

It is also why I will be disappointed if they don't go the suicide route.
LHolmes
20-11-2016
He shouldn't have been axed in the first place. Danny Boy just needed a chance to show what he can do, now he's got it he's doing a great job.

I'm sure he'll do well after the show anyway - he can sing, dance and act. Isn't bad looking either.

Lee and the Cokers are the exits I'm most disappointed in. You could make an argument for keeping Babe (unlike Ronnie and Claudette she hasn't killed anyone, and she is quite amusing stirring it up sometimes) and Roxy (isn't as tarnished as Ronnie and could flourish without her, I thought Rita did a good job in the scenes where Dean tried to rape Roxy) too but Lee and the Cokers are the most senseless. I'm not judging SOC too harshly for these hasty decisions though - I'm still enjoying the improvement in writing/characterisation on his watch.
Aaron_Silver
20-11-2016
Originally Posted by LHolmes:
“He shouldn't have been axed in the first place. Danny Boy just needed a chance to show what he can do, now he's got it he's doing a great job.

I'm sure he'll do well after the show anyway - he can sing, dance and act. Isn't bad looking either.

Lee and the Cokers are the exits I'm most disappointed in. You could make an argument for keeping Babe (unlike Ronnie and Claudette she hasn't killed anyone, and she is quite amusing stirring it up sometimes) and Roxy (isn't as tarnished as Ronnie and could flourish without her, I thought Rita did a good job in the scenes where Dean tried to rape Roxy) too but Lee and the Cokers are the most senseless. I'm not judging SOC too harshly for these hasty decisions though - I'm still enjoying the improvement in writing/characterisation on his watch.”

Strongly agree with the BIB but disagree on most of the rest of that paragraph. The Cokers and Lee had lots of potential and were bagged far too quickly. I am not convinced about SOC at all even if he has sharpened up the writing.
nickymonger
20-11-2016
Originally Posted by LHolmes:
“He shouldn't have been axed in the first place. Danny Boy just needed a chance to show what he can do, now he's got it he's doing a great job.

I'm sure he'll do well after the show anyway - he can sing, dance and act. Isn't bad looking either.

Lee and the Cokers are the exits I'm most disappointed in. You could make an argument for keeping Babe (unlike Ronnie and Claudette she hasn't killed anyone, and she is quite amusing stirring it up sometimes) and Roxy (isn't as tarnished as Ronnie and could flourish without her, I thought Rita did a good job in the scenes where Dean tried to rape Roxy) too but Lee and the Cokers are the most senseless. I'm not judging SOC too harshly for these hasty decisions though - I'm still enjoying the improvement in writing/characterisation on his watch.”

Last I checked being a killer wasn't a reason to axe a character? Usually axings are due to poor performance, EP and actors not being on the same page surrounding character progression, natural progression of a story, to create a big exit story for awards and drama etc..., character poorly received by audience, character not doing much and no idea where to take them. And I would have thought with Lee it was for storyline purposes. He has been a character shown with depression and it is quite topical people in depression committing suicide with family having no idea. I would have thought his axing was to then have the ability to tell this story and something new.
nickymonger
20-11-2016
Originally Posted by Aaron_Silver:
“Strongly agree with the BIB but disagree on most of the rest of that paragraph. The Cokers and Lee had lots of potential and were bagged far too quickly. I am not convinced about SOC at all even if he has sharpened up the writing.”

The Cokers are an example of what I mentioned earlier. A good story writer never runs out of stories for characters and can always recreate interest/ send characters in a new direction. The Cokers were poorly received by the audience due to the writing. That changed and their interactions with others changed, so by the time they left they were well liked.

With Lee, I'm okay with him leaving as I've wanted them to be brave and have a prominent character commit suicide, not due to a psychotic episode or big drama, but a more character driven plot of depression and no one noticing, with families devastated afterwards. Unfortunately that means a death, but it is an important story to tell. And personally I think a better exit than some big dramatic fire/ drowning after police chase etc...
Adrian_Ward1
20-11-2016
Originally Posted by Subtronix:
“I'd keep him and get rid of his girlfriend, she brings nothing to the show at all”

Shona is a great actresses
Yoshi Fan
20-11-2016
Originally Posted by Nefersitra:
“No - simply because any sympathy I feel for the Character is based only on the last few weeks which are obviously part of his exit story.

Before this the character lacked any real development - even his original depression storyline was poor and didn't add any depth to Lee.

Unfortunately, we've seen this with all of DTC's characters - they aren't fully rounded people (except Mick and Linda and maybe Babe), just one dimensional cut-outs/placeholders/ticks in the diversity boxes - for example Donna is disabled, Kyle is transgender, Paul was gay.”

I agree. A good few weeks for his impending exit cannot cover up the fact that he's been a bland bore for the first 2 and a half years of his existence. I still don't rate Danny as an actor either...he's improved in recent weeks, but he's still mediocre at best.
sorcha_healy27
20-11-2016
Originally Posted by T.K. Mazin:
“I am just joking . Sorcha knows that. She's always been understanding about my urge to crack a joke at any given opportunity. .

T.K does not run, I'm a lover, not a runner. She can chase me upstairs all she wants .”




I laughed at the comment myself although I felt disgusted afterwards
Soapfan678
20-11-2016
Originally Posted by Adrian_Ward1:
“Shona is a great actresses”

I agree. Some people want to get rid of a good actress and are asking for her to get sacked, because they don't like Whitney. It's pathetic. Sean obviously sees something in Shona, otherwise he would have axed her and would have neglected the character. I like Whitney and glad she is staying.
Adrian_Ward1
20-11-2016
Originally Posted by Soapfan678:
“I agree. Some people want to get rid of a good actress and are asking for her to get sacked, because they don't like Whitney. It's pathetic. Sean obviously sees something in Shona, otherwise he would have axed her and would have neglected the character. I like Whitney and glad she is staying.”



Spot on completly agree.
LHolmes
20-11-2016
Originally Posted by Yoshi Fan:
“A good few weeks for his impending exit cannot cover up the fact that he's been a bland bore for the first 2 and a half years of his existence.”

Largely because they didn't give him anything to do. Any incoming character will look surplus to requirements if never given a storyline.

It's different to when established characters go through lean periods as they've had chance(s) to prove themselves in the past. Although even then you still get people saying they should be axed as they no longer offer anything.

For me Lee and the Cokers are proof that - unless you're dealing with a really atrocious actor eg. Khali Best, Tony Discipline - underused characters should be given a chance to handle a storyline before the axe is swung.
LHolmes
20-11-2016
Originally Posted by nickymonger:
“Last I checked being a killer wasn't a reason to axe a character?”

It's not just that with Ronnie. It's the fact her characterisation has been all over the place lacking fluidity over the past couple of years. Consequently Sam has been phoning in her performances.

But Ronnie's involvement in Fatboy's death is harder for the audience to forgive than Carl's. Carl was a nothing character and the bad guy of the piece between him and Ronnie. Fatboy, while never an A lister, was established, likeable, and popular with a certain section of the audience. That outcome did Ronnie no favours.

It's not like she was an isolated example either. Add on Claudette as another character getting away with murder and the Beale storyline and the show was top heavy with characters who'd done awful things without a comeuppance.
finlux
21-11-2016
Originally Posted by LHolmes:
“For me Lee and the Cokers are proof that - unless you're dealing with a really atrocious actor eg. Khali Best, Tony Discipline - underused characters should be given a chance to handle a storyline before the axe is swung.”

Spot on. They should be given a chance to prove themselves. FWIW, I've warmed more to Lee since SOC has taken over. And whilst he's not the best actor, nor the worst, perhaps he should be given a chance.
Eastenders_Fan4
21-11-2016
The only trouble is it'll be 'unfair' to the rest that are leaving
Ancalagon
21-11-2016
I would love it if he was given a reprieve! When his axing was first announced I wasn't bothered but his depressions storyline has suddenly got very good and I've warmed to him (and his bum lol) very much!
nickymonger
21-11-2016
Originally Posted by finlux:
“Spot on. They should be given a chance to prove themselves. FWIW, I've warmed more to Lee since SOC has taken over. And whilst he's not the best actor, nor the worst, perhaps he should be given a chance.”

But then what happens with the story? Stories are created for reasons. You can't have a depression story without a strong message. And those 2 messages which will add impact, get awards, tell a story are attempted suicide and suicide. And whilst attempted suicide hs been done in prior stories many times, actual suicide besides euthanasia and dramatic exits for villains or crazy people has not been done in a case like this. And look at the stats...it tells a stronger story when they follow through with what can happen in the real word and repercussions from that. And they may only do attempted suicide but then if the are realistic Lee should be off for at least a number of months recovering through psychiatric care. But I do feel that since this is a second part to the story, it would have much more impact if he died. It's not about the actor, but the story. And maybe this was their plan for Lee all along. Maybe the actor is happy to leave?

But yes, EPs need to be brave when killing off characters as that can come back to bite them and future EPs. So if doing it, normally it would need to have a great story behind it.
Ancalagon
21-11-2016
Originally Posted by nickymonger:
“But then what happens with the story? Stories are created for reasons. You can't have a depression story without a strong message. And those 2 messages which will add impact, get awards, tell a story are attempted suicide and suicide. And whilst attempted suicide hs been done in prior stories many times, actual suicide besides euthanasia and dramatic exits for villains or crazy people has not been done in a case like this. And look at the stats...it tells a stronger story when they follow through with what can happen in the real word and repercussions from that. And they may only do attempted suicide but then if the are realistic Lee should be off for at least a number of months recovering through psychiatric care. But I do feel that since this is a second part to the story, it would have much more impact if he died. It's not about the actor, but the story. And maybe this was their plan for Lee all along. Maybe the actor is happy to leave?

But yes, EPs need to be brave when killing off characters as that can come back to bite them and future EPs. So if doing it, normally it would need to have a great story behind it.”

The story would have much more impact if Lee died, but as that is just speculation at this point that he might kill himself, I see no reason he can't be given a reprieve. An attempted suicide would have just as much of an impact, especially on his loved ones who are so clueless about his condition and what he going though.

Also I think you will be hard pressed to find any actor who is happy to be axed.
nickymonger
21-11-2016
Originally Posted by Ancalagon:
“The story would have much more impact if Lee died, but as that is just speculation at this point that he might kill himself, I see no reason he can't be given a reprieve. An attempted suicide would have just as much of an impact, especially on his loved ones who are so clueless about his condition and what he going though.

Also I think you will be hard pressed to find any actor who is happy to be axed.”

This is a mute point anyway. My understanding is that he has already left hasn't he? And if not, it is close to leaving. I don't think they are going to rewrite scripts just for 1 mediocre actor? Even if improved; scripts are planned months in advance and they would have planned after stories for Whitney and the family. However he leaves; that would have been planned and scripted. I'd be mighty surprised at any show rewriting all that for what has been a small character.
<<
<
2 of 3
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map