|
||||||||
This is why killing R&R was a waste |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,174
|
This is why killing R&R was a waste
That aftermath was a like a damp squid.
We don't see the bodies being discovered, we don't see the children being told (and I imagine we won't either) and the reactions we did get were quite frankly underwhelming. In fact, Louise's reaction was probably the most effective and it wasn't revisited later. I also don't think Maslen is a strong enough actor to pull this off long term. He wasn't even that great in this episode but I felt that's more to do with the material he had to work with. The episode kept cutting far, far too early. This is exactly why their deaths are a complete waste. |
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 740
|
It was a brave move
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vanishing Point
Posts: 3,125
|
A damp squid hahaha
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,034
|
Damp squid - that just about sums it up perfectly.
I know that many people are enjoying it, but for me they are getting so much wrong at the moments, it's actually quite unbelievable. I always think that a truly entertaining episode should make you want to re-watch it (Like when the Vic burn't down in 2010) has anybody wanted to watch yesterday/todays episodes again? It's such a shame, two great actresses, two great characters - if you're going to kill them both off, it could have been incredible if done differently. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: With My Courtney Mitchell
Posts: 1,084
|
Quote:
That aftermath was a like a damp squid.
We don't see the bodies being discovered, we don't see the children being told (and I imagine we won't either) and the reactions we did get were quite frankly underwhelming. In fact, Louise's reaction was probably the most effective and it wasn't revisited later. I also don't think Maslen is a strong enough actor to pull this off long term. He wasn't even that great in this episode but I felt that's more to do with the material he had to work with. The episode kept cutting far, far too early. This is exactly why their deaths are a complete waste. 2. Jack referenced in tonight episode that he didn't want to tell the children yet so it didn't happen yet in which i wouldn't blame him because telling the kids that their aunt and mother died would be very hard |
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,174
|
I've just posed this question on another thread but would Matthew Robinson have dared to kill off Phil and Grant when they crashed into the Thames in 1999?
Like the sisters, they had been in the show for 9 years but would Robinson or any producer for that matter, even thought twice about killing them off? |
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,034
|
Quote:
1. There was no point in showing someone discovering their bodies because it probably would be staff member that would find it and we wouldn't get the same shock reaction from that.
2. Jack referenced in tonight episode that he didn't want to tell the children yet so it didn't happen yet in which i wouldn't blame him because telling the kids that their aunt and mother died would be very hard |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,174
|
Quote:
1. There was no point in showing someone discovering their bodies because it probably would be staff member that would find it and we wouldn't get the same shock reaction from that.
2. Jack referenced in tonight episode that he didn't want to tell the children yet so it didn't happen yet in which i wouldn't blame him because telling the kids that their aunt and mother died would be very hard As for telling the children, I get that but for dramatic purposes, it's best to do something like this almost instantly. I think back to when Ian told Peter and then Cindy and Bobby which was completely heartbreaking. It's moments like this that can make or break an episode. |
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,439
|
Quote:
Who said Max didn't go looking for them? Understandably Jack nodded off as he was lying in bed, reading a story, after a few too many drinks no doubt. But Max was sober and waiting for Roxy who told him she'd be 20 minutes. After an hour, he'd have gone looking or for just left. Ultimately it comes down to lazy writing!
As for telling the children, I get that but for dramatic purposes, it's best to do something like this almost instantly. I think back to when Ian told Peter and then Cindy and Bobby which was completely heartbreaking. It's moments like this that can make or break an episode. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,067
|
tonight was crap in all honesty and now that the shock value is over were left with the aftermath that these characters can never return.
I'm sure I read he made an offer they couldn't refuse they must still be waiting as I refuse to accept that this was it and where the bloody hell was Glenda, it's just been months now of one step forward and 2 back, who thought it necessary we needed the reactions of Stacey and Martin when we don't even get one from their actual mother |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 212
|
I just can't seem to get my head around it. The whole thing just seems so cruel. (I can still hear Ronnie screaming!
) SOC clearly hated the characters - I just don't know why Rita and Sam agreed to it, they obviously didn't want to go that way. What makes me sad is that these two characters had so much history within they square, they'd been part of so many big stories, especially Ronnie. For me, they were iconic, and they should have been on the square for much longer. OK, I can understand maybe they needed a rest but I just don't understand why SOC thought killing them was a good idea. Like so many have said, tonight felt flat. Yesterday was a good visually and emotionally but today was just....boring. It's obviously not part of a wider plan, he just wanted to get rid of two popular characters he didn't like. I've always thought Sam was an incredible actress (she was amazing in the Danielle storyline) and a huge loss to the show. Also, by killing of R&R, we're robbed of Glenda, who is fabulous! Her last few appearances have been brilliant. I just don't think it was a clever move and I'm worried about what's going to come next. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 22,614
|
I'm still upset about how they died. In the end, I just don't think it was worth doing this. I'm disappointed because I loved R&R. I still can't get over it.
![]() Scott Maslen did a great job tonight but looking back at the rest of the episode, it just fell completely flat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 3,581
|
They are two of the best characters from the last 10 years and both fantastic characters with lots of ties to the show. I think it's a big mistake killing them off. The Mitchell's are such a big part of eastenders it's always good to have others to hold up the family front when Phil's not around.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 6,560
|
This is the second damp 'squid' I have seen on the forum tonight
![]() I agree with most of the points here. I won't repeat my feelings on this dreadful producer as I have aired them manger occasion already. I thought nothing could top the Pat Butcher blunder, but I only felt that a year or so after her death. I immediately know this is a massive mistake . I am ASTONISHED the BBC have allowed this to go ahead. I understand SOC had the idea, but I presume someone else has to give the 'green light' And I too will miss Glenda! I presume we will never see her again after her current stint. Absolute ****ing travesty. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 337
|
Obviously the new visionary felt those 4 minutes of excitement yesterday would be too much for our faint little hearts and decided we needed to return to talking about Arthur sitting on boxes, Ian's hairline, pub breakfasts and mustard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,746
|
Yep Louise gave the best reaction for a distant relative when compared with those much closer relationships to R&R
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 717
|
For me it was when Sharon told Phil, then the tears came
![]() Although to give Scott Maslen his due, he didn't do too bad. It was a bit annoying the way everyone was being told but we never actually heard it, until Sharon. I know they can't repeat it being told to everyone but it just felt a bit of a let down to me. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 717
|
Quote:
I've just posed this question on another thread but would Matthew Robinson have dared to kill off Phil and Grant when they crashed into the Thames in 1999?
Like the sisters, they had been in the show for 9 years but would Robinson or any producer for that matter, even thought twice about killing them off? Ronnie and Roxy were the best of the Mitchell clan. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,429
|
The whole thing is an absolute ****ing travesty and SOC is by far the most selfish, self absorbed producer the show has EVER had.
He's gotten rid of, what, about 13 characters now? Now some, fair enough it happens. I didn't agree with the Cokers leaving but they were newish characters and producers often come in and get rid of the newest. The Mitchell sisters were something else. Whilst they might have gone round in circles a bit over the years, they were, especially Ronnie, two of the biggest characters from the show's past decade. And because he couldn't think of anything to do with the , he axes them. But not content with just sending them off so that another producer who actually knows what they're doing can use them, he kills them both off??! The Mitchells as a family unit have been completely decimated - Peggy is gone, Phil is a now old and decrepit and now it falls to Sharon, Louise, Ben and Jay to keep their legacy alive? I'm genuinely furious as you can tell. SOC is an absolute power hungry moron. It's not just even that - the laundrette? A set that has been there from the start and has been the setting for some iconic scenes over the years? Gone. It's very late and I'm tired but as far as I'm comcernd, the sooner the BBC see sense and get rid of him, the better. I do fear that he has actually done some irreparable damage though. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: County Durham
Posts: 15,061
|
Quote:
The whole thing is an absolute ****ing travesty and SOC is by far the most selfish, self absorbed producer the show has EVER had.
He's gotten rid of, what, about 13 characters now? Now some, fair enough it happens. I didn't agree with the Cokers leaving but they were newish characters and producers often come in and get rid of the newest. The Mitchell sisters were something else. Whilst they might have gone round in circles a bit over the years, they were, especially Ronnie, two of the biggest characters from the show's past decade. And because he couldn't think of anything to do with the , he axes them. But not content with just sending them off so that another producer who actually knows what they're doing can use them, he kills them both off??! The Mitchells as a family unit have been completely decimated - Peggy is gone, Phil is a now old and decrepit and now it falls to Sharon, Louise, Ben and Jay to keep their legacy alive? I'm genuinely furious as you can tell. SOC is an absolute power hungry moron. It's not just even that - the laundrette? A set that has been there from the start and has been the setting for some iconic scenes over the years? Gone. It's very late and I'm tired but as far as I'm comcernd, the sooner the BBC see sense and get rid of him, the better. I do fear that he has actually done some irreparable damage though. Maybe the aftermath episode could have been done a little differently. So what? I have to agree with others when they say we can't have been watching so many people being told in the same way again and again. I think the grief has been conveyed very effectively. Jack. Louise. Ben, Sharon all reacted in very different ways. Life is cold and hard for the people left behind. So another producer has made the decision to kill off some characters that they liked. Hard luck. The way some people are reacting is like SOC has committed crime of the century, Perosnally I think he's started off 2017 with a bamg and those last 10 minutes will go down as some of the most iconic in the shows history. I for one will never forget it, |
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,439
|
Quote:
The whole thing is an absolute ****ing travesty and SOC is by far the most selfish, self absorbed producer the show has EVER had.
He's gotten rid of, what, about 13 characters now? Now some, fair enough it happens. I didn't agree with the Cokers leaving but they were newish characters and producers often come in and get rid of the newest. The Mitchell sisters were something else. Whilst they might have gone round in circles a bit over the years, they were, especially Ronnie, two of the biggest characters from the show's past decade. And because he couldn't think of anything to do with the , he axes them. But not content with just sending them off so that another producer who actually knows what they're doing can use them, he kills them both off??! The Mitchells as a family unit have been completely decimated - Peggy is gone, Phil is a now old and decrepit and now it falls to Sharon, Louise, Ben and Jay to keep their legacy alive? I'm genuinely furious as you can tell. SOC is an absolute power hungry moron. It's not just even that - the laundrette? A set that has been there from the start and has been the setting for some iconic scenes over the years? Gone. It's very late and I'm tired but as far as I'm comcernd, the sooner the BBC see sense and get rid of him, the better. I do fear that he has actually done some irreparable damage though. The only way the show can move on is to refresh the cast, build up some of the 'middling' characters and introduce new ones. The same with the launderette. Okay it's been there from the start but it's increasingly irrelevant in 2017. Soaps are notorious for clinging onto their past and EE is actually quite good at keeping up with the times. Sometimes you have to be bold to reflect the real world, otherwise you end up with Corrie - a massive cast of poorly written characters, many of which feel like they've been there, just hanging around, for ever, a set that's barely changed for twenty or thirty years (even to the extent that the pub and shops etc are rebuilt to look exactly the same after each explosion). They still have the tiresome out-dated factory and a cobbled street, for heaven's sake. EE is positioning itself well for the future and I have faith in SOC's tenure. Perhaps in a few years he can move to ITV and do the same overhaul job on Corrie?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,702
|
The last producer killed off Nick Cotton now that was a travesty and pointless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 143
|
I am still hoping like a fool that when they come to identifying the bodies we find out the one of them is not a sister. Now that would be a amazing twist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: North of England
Posts: 14,119
|
I'd have gotten rid of Tina, Shakil and Carmel instead of Ronnie, Roxy and even Belinda. R&R simply needed new focus preferably more separate lives on the Square. Belinda's exit was terribly written and shouldn't have even happened.
Tina is a spare part these days, the most pointless Carter. Shakil is the worst character on the show and Carmel has regressed badly having started off so well to the point I don't care if she's there or gone. Kush is a good enough character without them, perhaps they could've introduced his other brother and his wife. If Rakhee Thakrar hadn't left I think the scripts for Shabnam and Stacey might have panned out very differently today (re their babies). |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2015
Location: 🕳
Posts: 1,844
|
Squib.
I really enjoyed it and it was time to kill those characters off. Good stuff. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:39.




) 
