DS Forums

 
 

Eastenders: New Michelle


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-01-2017, 10:35
AuntieSoap
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,607
Personally I'm fine with the recast. As I said above I didn't see the original Michelle and in all honesty the Fowlers, except for Mark, were never my favourite family in the first place despite their iconic status.

As brilliant an actress as Wendy Richard was, I never warmed to Pauline in the way I did to Pat or Dot. Aside from some excellent putdowns they went too far making her this miserable battleaxe with no warmth at all. Something other matriarchs like Pat had in abundance.

The original Martin was fine but I wasn't massively upset about the recast. James Bye has stepped into the role and is doing well with it now.

Mark was hands down my favourite Fowler.
The original Martin was never as integral to the show as Michelle was. I agree James Bye is very likeable in the role, I have no issue with his performance, but I don't see him as being linked to Pauline, Arthur, Mark or Lou in any way.

If these new Fowlers had been cast while some of the originals were still around it would have been different perhaps, but I feel absolutely nothing when "Michelle" talks about Pauline and Arthur. If Susan Tully had returned it would be a completely different story.

Her scenes with Sharon don't make me remember the girls they once were because there is a different actress. They can't just transfer that rich legacy and expect viewers to accept it. Well they can, but they can't assume it will succeed.
AuntieSoap is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 03-01-2017, 10:36
davejc64
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,983
This cracks me up and is so typical of this forum these days. We are told for months at a time that we are not seeing the new producer's "vision", then we have to give time for "bedding in" and now we are saying that we should not make a judgement on a character for a whole year. Hilarious and complete nonsense. Highly delusional.

It takes time to establish a new character, but Michelle isn't a new character. By recasting a character that was pivotal for many years and often mentioned since departing they are taking a significant risk.

Personally I have absolutely no sense of her being Michelle Fowler. None. That's the problem. Michelle has been brought back because of her undeniable legacy within the show, but none of that legacy resonates because they have changed actress. If the original actress was not open to returning the plans should have been shelved.

You are right that many viewers won't have seen the original Michelle, but many will and it feels like a betrayal of the audience to do this just as the stupid, pointless resurrection of Kathy was a betrayal and a complete flop.
'Betrayal' what utter overdramatic nonsense all they have done is replace one actor for another because the original actor no longer wanted to play the part.
davejc64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 10:42
SuperSoaper
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,685
Something doesn't sit right with me. Unlike with the recast of Martin, I'm not buying her as Michelle, but an entirely different character. I also find her acting a bit flat.
SuperSoaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 10:55
AuntieSoap
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,607
'Betrayal' what utter overdramatic nonsense all they have done is replace one actor for another because the original actor no longer wanted to play the part.
Great argument there. Your input in the discussion is invaluable... sorry I meant snide

AuntieSoap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 10:55
judy08
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Woodberry
Posts: 188
As others have said, give the actress a fair go. Yes Michelle was a prime character but that was 20 years ago.
judy08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 10:58
davejc64
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,983
Great argument there. Your input in the discussion is invaluable... sorry I meant snide

It's ok, I know it's hard for you to accept someone not having the same opinion as you.
davejc64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 11:03
AuntieSoap
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,607
As others have said, give the actress a fair go. Yes Michelle was a prime character but that was 20 years ago.
Then why not recast Grant if Ross Kemp won't come back permanently? It's the logical extension...

Let's bring back Angie with a new head and say she faked her own death... Let's plunder the past but not respect it in any way.

It makes me laugh that people who condemned DTC for rewriting established backstory now welcome this!
AuntieSoap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 11:04
LHolmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,005
James Alexandrou didn’t interact with Bill Treacher or Susan Tully, people still believed him as Arthur’s son and Michelle’s brother.

Martin was not beyond a recast. He was only 10 when James A took over the role and had limited screentime until the early 00s, even then only his relationship with Sonia was memorable but not particularly popular.

I agree that Michelle is a different kettle of fish but it does help that 20 years have passed and that the actress no longer acts. I'm not saying I'm sold because I have been struggling to adjust to the new one too but I am not writing her off.
LHolmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 11:06
AuntieSoap
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,607
It's ok, I know it's hard for you to accept someone not having the same opinion as you.
No you don't know that. No really, you don't. You are trying to be sarcastic, and not succeeding.

AuntieSoap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 11:09
AuntieSoap
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,607
James Alexandrou didn’t interact with Bill Treacher or Susan Tully, people still believed him as Arthur’s son and Michelle’s brother.

Martin was not beyond a recast. He was only 10 when James A took over the role and had limited screentime until the early 00s, even then only his relationship with Sonia was memorable but not particularly popular.

I agree that Michelle is a different kettle of fish but it does help that 20 years have passed and that the actress no longer acts. I'm not saying I'm sold because I have been struggling to adjust to the new one too but I am not writing her off.
Kids in soaps tend to back seat characters until 10/12 and are usually recast around that age. The thing with Alexandrou was that Martin didn't have a high profile within the show until his teens and he did appear with Pauline and Mark, so the link to Arthur and Lou was not as tenuous.

This recast is plundering the fruits of the past and expecting us to accept it as genuine when it's not.
AuntieSoap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 11:13
PorkchopExpress
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North Lanarkshire
Posts: 3,175
I don't like the Fowlers at all to be honest.

Michelle is awful so far.
Martin is an absolute prick generally..
PorkchopExpress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 11:19
Ten_Ben
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,439
'Betrayal' what utter overdramatic nonsense all they have done is replace one actor for another because the original actor no longer wanted to play the part.
Agreed. Writing off the recast after a week and a half is ridiculous. Why should they lose a character entirely just because the original actress won't come back? The character is more important than the actor and you shouldn't have potential storylines held back because a former actor is effectively holding the producers to ransom. I'm not saying that Tully was but the point still holds.

Grant is a completely different matter as Ross Kemp has been in the show recently and had regular returns prior to last summer. I'd accept a recast of Grant if we hadn't seen him for 20 years. 20 years is a massive amount of time, so yes, I'm happy to see Michelle again even if it is a new actor (despite watching Tully from day one in EE and in GH before that). It's only a fictional soap, after all. I had to adjust to seeing Suzanne Ross morph into Michelle Fowler, so I can adjust to Michelle being played by someone else; I'm not saying it's easy but it's quite do-able over time.
Ten_Ben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 11:20
davejc64
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,983
No you don't know that. No really, you don't. You are trying to be sarcastic, and not succeeding.

No of course, I haven't succeeded, much.
davejc64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 11:27
davejc64
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,983
I actually think they have got the character of Michelle down pretty well what she used to be, a somewhat dowdy miserable person and that is the way she is being portrayed now, if they had bought her back dolled up loud and brash then people would have something to complain about.
davejc64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 11:29
jamesc_715
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: South West England
Posts: 4,624
People change over the course of a lifetime and it's natural she isn't the same person anymore. O'Connor said it'd be interesting to see her as a changed woman after 20 years according to his interview. I think she's doing a great job as Michelle and she will make the role her own, in my opinion. Her character traits are still the same, eg: interfering but loyal and kind.
jamesc_715 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 12:28
AuntieSoap
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,607
Agreed. Writing off the recast after a week and a half is ridiculous. Why should they lose a character entirely just because the original actress won't come back? The character is more important than the actor and you shouldn't have potential storylines held back because a former actor is effectively holding the producers to ransom. I'm not saying that Tully was but the point still holds.

Grant is a completely different matter as Ross Kemp has been in the show recently and had regular returns prior to last summer. I'd accept a recast of Grant if we hadn't seen him for 20 years. 20 years is a massive amount of time, so yes, I'm happy to see Michelle again even if it is a new actor (despite watching Tully from day one in EE and in GH before that). It's only a fictional soap, after all. I had to adjust to seeing Suzanne Ross morph into Michelle Fowler, so I can adjust to Michelle being played by someone else; I'm not saying it's easy but it's quite do-able over time.
They should not be separate and that's the problem. They are intrinsically linked. If Tully was not interested why not just create a new character for Jenna Russell? Because they wanted to plunder the history, but it's not transferable.
AuntieSoap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 12:28
AuntieSoap
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,607
No of course, I haven't succeeded, much.
not at all
AuntieSoap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 12:29
The Queen Vic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,911
She's been in about five episode for God's sake. Give her a chance.
The Queen Vic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 12:46
sorcha_healy27
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 68,911
She's been in about five episode for God's sake. Give her a chance.
This is ds. There are no chances
sorcha_healy27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 12:50
Adrian_Ward1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Plymouth Devon
Posts: 12,456
I will look forward to finding out her secret
Adrian_Ward1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 13:03
nattoyaki
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,703
Yes, my thoughts exactly.

It's strange but I took to the new Lucy/Peter/Lauren & Martin straight away - even Mark when Todd Carty took over, but not yet with new Michelle.

Still, early days yet....
Of the adult(ish) recasts only Lauren worked for me. For those who remember Susan in the role I can't imagine a recast working at all. I'm glad I don't watch anymore actually when I read of such sacrilege!
nattoyaki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 13:15
Jimmy Connors
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Home For The Bewildered
Posts: 86,508
I will look forward to finding out her secret
Yes that is something to look forward to.

I can't understand why she has returned now, yet stayed away from her own parents funerals, and her brother's funeral. Yet she's back now when nothing (to do with her family) has happened. Guess we'll find out in due course.
Jimmy Connors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 13:21
Babe Rainbow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 25,048
I stopped watching EE regularly when A/ The Mitchells started to dominate every storyine and B/ when Michelle got pregnant by Grant. The SWs really failed Michelle's character on that, for me. Michelle would never have betrayed Sharon in that way again - not after Den.

I did stick with it for a few years after that on a hit and miss basis but I very rarely watch it now - only very occasionally if an episode is fanfaired like this week's demise of Ronnie & Roxy was ( I barely even know who they are in the Mitchell family tree ). But have never felt any pull to stick around for any longer.

So I did see a bit of NewMichelle. RealMichelle ( Susan Tully ) is probably the only original character that I would stick with it for. But no. Watched the two episodes and won't bother going back again imminently. NewMichelle doesn't have an ounce of the personality of the original.
Babe Rainbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 13:29
SepangBlue
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,519
I started a thread about the new Michelle a few days ago http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2196291

In addition to the points I made previously, it annoys me that a new character swans into a series and seems to try to take over. Currently she's a guest in Stacey & Martin's home, Stacey is the queen of her kitchen, so what right has Michelle to bulldozer proceedings and start cooking, without so much as a by your leave.

I've been advised by other posters to 'give it time - you'll soon forget she's not an older Susan Tully'. Frankly I've a gut feeling that this will be a very long wait indeed!
SepangBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 13:29
SlingYerHook
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 204
I only vaugely remember Susan Tulley as Michelle, so would imagine I'll adjust easier than some.

But.... What I will say ,is her characterisation actually reminds me of...... PAULINE?!?


Anyone else? Not in looks, but ways.
SlingYerHook is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:41.