• 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
EE: That was a great ending for the Mitchell Sisters...
<<
<
4 of 8
>>
>
AuntieSoap
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by xTonix:
“But the other soaps love a bit of a fire, car crash, death after death in the small farm, or the oldie soap, or the teenie soap.”

You are absolutely right. There is far too much reliance on sensational "events" to the point that explosions, fires, crashes have no impact any more.

That doesn't justify the work experience guy playing with slo-mo and it being left in the episode... that's the only explanation I can think of. Surely professionals are not serving this up to us?
Lady Voldemort
01-01-2017
It was an amazingly atmospheric episode. Obviously Ronnie had to finally be happy so it could all go to shit one last time.
AuntieSoap
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by Damon_Plembury:
“People can drown in 3 inches of water if they pass out”

That is absolutely true. But that doesn't make it a believable storyline. There are lots of things that can happen that would be out of place in EE because they become contrived. Kathy's return should have proved that. That something could happen does not make it believable or credible.
Makson
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by KornerKabin:
“This is small a pay off for long term fans of the show - who are surely the lifeblood of any long-running series, soap or otherwise?

Taken alone, the scene with Ronnie and Roxy squirting the had no impact on the episode at all meaning no impact on your so-called 'average casual viewer'. It was just another moment in what was, in my opinion, a great segment of dancing and frivolity. For longer term viewers, it was a lovely moment of nostalgia that referenced back to when the characters first arrived. Not even every long-term viewer would remember that, but those who did got a lot of pleasure from it.

You didn't need to have any 'knowingness' (whatever that means) about Ronnie or Roxy to enjoy that scene.

Sorry but I think you're making a silly claim here.”

Blimey, glad I missed this graphic scene
KornerKabin
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by AuntieSoap:
“It was completely out of place in EastEnders. The promo you mention was just that a promo, not part of the show. Now the main show is referencing it's past promos? Too much focus on this sort contrivance than on believable, character led narrative.

In fairness we did get some of that tonight from Mick and Lee. Lee being particularly good tonight.

That is what EastEnders should be doing, not using music tracks and slo-mo. They are contrived, silly, dated and lazy. Can the writers not write scripts that convey all we need to know? Do producers have to rely on these hackneyed devices? It's dire and damaging.

Presume that clarifies for you.”

Doesn't clarify anything, I'm afraid. I understand and respect your opinion but disagree that it was 'completely out of place' in EastEnders. In my view it has a perfect place in the show, a gentle nod to things that viewers will already know about but not having any impact on those that don't. I would like to emphasise my use of the word gentle. All the nods and references to Ronnie and Roxy's time on the show were just that: gentle. I didn't really see them as contrivances. There are far more contrived goings on in most soaps these days, small moments like these are almost insignificant.

Where is the believable, character-led narrative though? That hasn't been a staple part of EastEnders or any other British soap for at least a decade now. I want solid characters and strong, character-driven drama. I agree with you that this is an integral part of British soap. This kind of writing is the only way to keep them grounded and not darting off to the realms of the absurd.

In my opinion, EastEnders has positioned itself in a firm middle-ground with this episode, producing something between 'shock' and 'explosive' drama and the more character-led elements. The deaths being fully accidental were, in my view, one of the main markers of this. No drawn out revenge plot, whodunnit or melodramatic fight on top of a building. Just two characters doing something that they really shouldn't have which ended in tragedy. It could've happened to any one of us if the circumstances were dangerous enough. To me that's far more powerful than an explosion every other week that has no lasting impact.
LHolmes
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by wendyhouse:
“With all due respect, Sam Womack and Rita Simmons are twenty times more talented than Scott Maslen, and yet he gets to stay whereas they were axed? WTF.”

I wouldn't be surprised if Jack's on borrowed time now.
KornerKabin
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by Makson:
“Blimey, glad I missed this graphic scene”

There was a helpline number available at the end Makson ... don't worry
boshealecta
01-01-2017
Regardless of whether they should have been killed off or not (sometimes I like it when popular characters are killed off, that's life) I feel they made a mistake not keeping Roxy alive.

Eventually this death will be forgotten about and everyone will get on with their life but to have the option to bring back Roxy who has to live with the guilt that her behaviour killed her sister is a great avenue for a future producer to explore and a brill twist to have Roxy at the side of the pool at the end.
David Wright
01-01-2017
I thought it was terrible.

Why not just have Veronika ditch Jack The Plank at the aisle and drive off into the sunset with Roxy, Thelma and Louise style?
kitkat1971
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by AuntieSoap:
“BIB: Far to much focus on things like that. The average casual viewer will not have seen that and it smacks of knowingness. Focus on quality drama not gimmicks”

But it won't have detracted if you didn't get the reference,youd just think them using the syphons was another example of them enjoying themselves, same as all the dancing. The song accompanying it would be no more significant than Sweet Dreams.

I don't see why oridinary fans wouldn't get it anyway. That trailer was shown a lot on normal tv, it's not as though you e en needed to use the redbutton to see it back then. Some people will remember it, some won't, whether a casual viewer or a fan.

I can recall trailers for shows I don't watch just because they happened to be shown before or afyer something I did or do watch.
Michelle Jones
01-01-2017
Aww it felt really sad. All those years they've been in the show and everything they've been through, then both of them gone in a few seconds.

So symbolic that image of them at the end exactly the same as when they lay on the pavement a few eps ago.

It's weird how even though it's been massively publicised about the drowning, to see that it did actually happen was really sad and very powerful to me. What makes it sadder for me is that Sam and Rita didn't really want to leave. Despite the guff that's been spun, there's nothing mutual about this decision and you can tell they didn't really want to go
AuntieSoap
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by KornerKabin:
“Doesn't clarify anything, I'm afraid. I understand and respect your opinion but disagree that it was 'completely out of place' in EastEnders. In my view it has a perfect place in the show, a gentle nod to things that viewers will already know about but not having any impact on those that don't. I would like to emphasise my use of the word gentle. All the nods and references to Ronnie and Roxy's time on the show were just that: gentle. I didn't really see them as contrivances. There are far more contrived goings on in most soaps these days, small moments like these are almost insignificant.

Where is the believable, character-led narrative though? That hasn't been a staple part of EastEnders or any other British soap for at least a decade now. I want solid characters and strong, character-driven drama. I agree with you that this is an integral part of British soap. This kind of writing is the only way to keep them grounded and not darting off to the realms of the absurd.

In my opinion, EastEnders has positioned itself in a firm middle-ground with this episode, producing something between 'shock' and 'explosive' drama and the more character-led elements. The deaths being fully accidental were, in my view, one of the main markers of this. No drawn out revenge plot, whodunnit or melodramatic fight on top of a building. Just two characters doing something that they really shouldn't have which ended in tragedy. It could've happened to any one of us if the circumstances were dangerous enough. To me that's far more powerful than an explosion every other week that has no lasting impact.”

I certainly don't want explosions every other week. That approach has damaged Coronation Street hugely in my opinion, although that is a different thread and the reasons behind it more complex than mere fireworks.

You are right about British soaps in the last 10 years and it's a huge pity. Increased number of episodes, attempts to appeal to a particular demographic and pressure from bosses to make rating peaks.

For me anything on screen in EastEnders that takes me outside of the show is out of place. Playing fast and loose with established backstory and resurrecting dead characters is much worse, but it is all part of the same issue and it hurts the show. For me doing these things are absurd. A scene of dance and frivolity at a wedding is indeed perfectly in place. But it should not have been stylised in the form it was. Instead a capture of a moment in time at the wedding would have been much more effective.

When the writing is good there is no need to throw in these gimmicks.

I'm being very critical of all this and I stand by it, it my opinion, but I can say I thought the Carter aspect of the episode was much stronger. It was well written and leads to a very human dilema for Mick. How can he forget the unforgivable? Can he stop loving his son? Should he help his son who is in a very dangerous position given his recent mental health. Now that is powerful drama without and easy solutions (I hope).

So while you disagee, which is your absolute right, I think I have again clarified my point.
AuntieSoap
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by kitkat1971:
“But it won't have detracted if you didn't get the reference,youd just think them using the syphons was another example of them enjoying themselves, same as all the dancing. The song accompanying it would be no more significant than Sweet Dreams.

I don't see why oridinary fans wouldn't get it anyway. That trailer was shown a lot on normal tv, it's not as though you e en needed to use the redbutton to see it back then. Some people will remember it, some won't, whether a casual viewer or a fan.

I can recall trailers for shows I don't watch just because they happened to be shown before or afyer something I did or do watch.”

There is no place or should be no place for gimmicks like this.
KornerKabin
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by AuntieSoap:
“I certainly don't want explosions every other week. That approach has damaged Coronation Street hugely in my opinion, although that is a different thread and the reasons behind it more complex than mere fireworks.

You are right about British soaps in the last 10 years and it's a huge pity. Increased number of episodes, attempts to appeal to a particular demographic and pressure from bosses to make rating peaks.

For me anything on screen in EastEnders that takes me outside of the show is out of place. Playing fast and loose with established backstory and resurrecting dead characters is much worse, but it is all part of the same issue and it hurts the show. For me doing these things are absurd. A scene of dance and frivolity at a wedding is indeed perfectly in place. But it should not have been stylised in the form it was. Instead a capture of a moment in time at the wedding would have been much more effective.

When the writing is good there is no need to throw in these gimmicks.

I'm being very critical of all this and I stand by it, it my opinion, but I can say I thought the Carter aspect of the episode was much stronger. It was well written and leads to a very human dilema for Mick. How can he forget the unforgivable? Can he stop loving his son? Should he help his son who is in a very dangerous position given his recent mental health. Now that is powerful drama without and easy solutions (I hope).

So while you disagee, which is your absolute right, I think I have again clarified my point.”

I respect your opinion too AuntieSoap - definitely a moment of agree to disagree
kira nerys
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by Littlegreen42:
“I'm sorry but those two characters deserved better than that!

Disgusting.”

I agree 100%,it was an appalling way for them to leave,disgraceful
AuntieSoap
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by boshealecta:
“Regardless of whether they should have been killed off or not (sometimes I like it when popular characters are killed off, that's life) I feel they made a mistake not keeping Roxy alive.

Eventually this death will be forgotten about and everyone will get on with their life but to have the option to bring back Roxy who has to live with the guilt that her behaviour killed her sister is a great avenue for a future producer to explore and a brill twist to have Roxy at the side of the pool at the end.”

It seems there was determination to make sure they can never return. Short sighted. They both needed to be rested but in 10 years time it would be very interesting to revisit one or both. That can never happen and all for the most stylised series of shots I can remember with clocks and fairytales I predict it will be regretted.
AuntieSoap
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by KornerKabin:
“I respect your opinion too AuntieSoap - definitely a moment of agree to disagree ”

And that's the beauty of this forum, it's good that we get to consider aspects from each others perspective.
ArthurJBear
01-01-2017
An amazing episode and WHAT a way to go out - easy to see why Sam and Rita felt the couldn't turn it down - a fitting end for the inseparable Mitchell sisters - and will be one that will be remembered for years to come- by killing them off at least we will be spared the contrived reasons for brief returns in the future like we had with Peggy and Grant - at least they went out wit a bang and not a wimper as they would have done if they left - we'd probably would ave ad a few years with them bobbing in until one day we never heard from them again,
KornerKabin
01-01-2017
A little off topic, AuntieSoap, but Corrie experimented with some weird 'gimmicks' in the early 70s. For instance, I remember one episode where Elsie Tanner fell into some kind of flashback/dream sequence with voiceover from Ena Sharples. They then played a black-and-white clip from 1961 as the 'dream sequence'. Another episode from around the same time had heavily stylised segments using backing music and close up shots of flowers with soft focus. In another episode, there were flashed images of a shot of Elsie's handbag which she had left on a park bench interspersed with the main action of the episode. All very avant garde

The point I'm making is that at times the soap genre will always try and push the boundaries of what is possible. Obviously the stuff that Corrie tried in the 70s didn't catch on at all, but people will still keep trying to 'freshen up' the genre.

Needless to say, you'd have hated it!
Harlowe
01-01-2017
If you look at it from a point of view of not being furious or shocked by the ending, it fits them both.

Ronnie was always hailed as the tragic heroine, her fate was sealed, and so was Roxy's, because one could not work without there other, so they left as they come in together, tragically and final.

Why I may not agree with it, I can see the beauty in that episode, even if its hard to grasp atm.
Makson
01-01-2017
On a serious note, I feel really sorry for the owner of that country house......bookings will completely dry up now given its grisly association with two women drowning in the pool.
David Wright
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by Makson:
“On a serious note, I feel really sorry for the owner of that country house......bookings will completely dry up now given its grisly association with two women drowning in the pool.”

Perhaps their spirits will hang around for eternity like in The Shining!
Keibro
01-01-2017
Fabulous episode!
Controversial and very divisive ending for the sisters.

I loved their ending personally.
If you are going to leave or be written out after so many years, leave in a memorable way. And that was nothing if not memorable. It's still taking some to get used to it, but their exit wasn't the result of some long running feud, or a tram, or a big car crash with a big stunt, it was a tragic accident.

The sudden randomness of it I think is the most shocking. With a few hiccups, a wonderful day ends in a very dark grisly way. The silence was the most unnerving I think. I was waiting for one final twist where one of them moves or someone comes in to save them.

Ronnie's desperate screams and flailing about to grab Roxy echoed a prior New Year underwater episode, where the girls were in Epping Forest. Only this time they weren't so lucky..... it's shocking and I can imagine the next week on Albert Square will see the Mitchells turned upside down. Personally, I really enjoyed the episode, it was nice to see the girls as themselves one last time before their tragic demise.

Elsewhere, Mick and Lee's scenes were good. Danny continues to put in strong performances.

Tomorrow's episode is just going to be aftermath.
And just when people were moaning "oh it's too happy" well, Happy New Year
Michelle Jones
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by Harlowe:
“If you look at it from a point of view of not being furious or shocked by the ending, it fits them both.

Ronnie was always hailed as the tragic heroine, her fate was sealed, and so was Roxy's, because one could not work without there other, so they left as they come in together, tragically and final.

Why I may not agree with it, I can see the beauty in that episode, even if its hard to grasp atm.”

Totally agree with this. And I know SOC gets a lot of hate on here but you can see that's why he made decision...one doesn't work without the other. I know he could've gone with the option of them driving off in that car, but it wouldn't have had the same impact.

However I still feel sad that they can never return now. Still seems weird to me that they were axed and didn't make the decision to leave themselves. Especially Sam, as even before EE she was very well known. To me that shows SOC isn't scared to make these kind of decisions, so maybe nobody is safe!
kitkat1971
01-01-2017
Originally Posted by AuntieSoap:
“There is no place or should be no place for gimmicks like this.”

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

Whist I bssically agree that good solid, character led dialogue and plot drama such as the Carter scenes should be the foundation of soap andthey should never be reliant on gimmicks, I really don't see any issue with Directors being allowed to make things more interesting or stulish from time to time.

But, I see and respect where you're coming from. I just don't agree. I think the dire tion and winks to the audience re their promo added to my enjoyment.
<<
<
4 of 8
>>
>
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