Seen EastEnders recently? If you've drifted away from it, bored of silly sensational storylines involving improbable gangsters who never swear, now is the time to come back. Because after a long gap, EastEnders has rediscovered the beauty of the slow-burn storyline.
Back in the day (and trust me on this, I've been watching it since day one), storylines marinated and then brewed slowly but surely into plots that gripped and didn't require you to suspend your disbelief from too great a height. The decline and eventual death of Arthur Fowler took more than a year. With its roots subtly planted in the loss of his job, leading slowly to a nervous breakdown, the theft of the Christmas club money and, slowly, inexorably, his final sad demise off-screen in prison.
The pace was slower then - only two episodes a week - and EastEnders reflected real life more, I'd argue, than it does now. Great chunks of time passed when very little actually happened. The producers and scriptwriters knew the value of this: it meant that when something did happen, the impact was much greater. Who can forget Arthur's traumatic Christmas when the poor tortured man trashed his family sitting room? Sitting-room-trashing is pretty much a trope of soaps these days, but it was shocking in its intensity then.
When you've got one breathless, silly storyline after another, such as the regrettable obsession with gangsters that saw the speedy rise, fall and then plunge from a motorway bridge of Andy, a violent death or two is neither here nor there. The return of Dirty Den should have been water-cooler telly, but in the event, because it all happened so fast, if you blinked you'd have missed it. One minute he was there, the next he was being bashed over the head and buried beneath the Vic.
But there's a welcome renaissance of the slow burn storyline. Look at Stella, Phil's girlfriend. She's been around for ages and while we've been picking up whiffs that she might be a sandwich short of a picnic, it's only in the past couple of days that we're beginning to see that she's a full-blown, grade-A nutter. Her tormenting of Ben - who the scriptwriters cleverly had tormenting her in the first place - clearly has a long way to run yet.
And then there's the Dawn/Rob/May storyline. For those who haven't been paying attention, Dawn, a snotty little madam, had an affair with Rob. Later on he and his middle-class doctor wife May moved into the Square and the affair kicked off again. Dawn is now up the duff with Rob's baby and (keep up, this is where it gets complicated) not only has it been agreed that she will have the baby for Rob and the infertile May to adopt, May is encouraging Rob to pretend to Dawn that he's in love with her in order to prevent Dawn (still with me?) from either having an abortion or pushing off with the baby and leaving May without her longed-for child.
This has been going on for months and months, and it's still got some way to run. Watching the unlikeable May struggle with hating Rob for still ****ging Dawn yet encouraging it is riveting stuff.
This kind of storyline is good both for the viewer and the programme. It encourages the investment of time from the viewer, who finds the plotlines deeply involving and satisfying, and gets them hooked for the long term. That in turn delivers those all-important ratings for the BBC.
So get comfy on the sofa, because if the BBC has two braincells to rub together, we'll be seeing more of these involved, involving plotlines.
So basically, they're going back to the good old days of slow burning, realistic plots.
Or it could just be like the old days, where one presenter reads the headlines, then the regional insert, then the titles, then a camera swing of the presenters, then the presenter who read the headlines does the first story, then 2nd presenter reads 2nd story, then 1st presenter reads 3rd story, and so on.
Oh what! You mean you don't enjoy the exciting escapades of the Wicks family, Stella making Ben drinks, Max and Stacey committing the most unlikeliest affair in human mankind, and Honey mispronouncing her words.
This morning's main story: Rubbish collectors may only collect your rubbish every two weeks very soon or something. Then at 8.45 until 8.55 we had a feature about David Cameron's hair. Added to this the joy of the God-awful Turnbull and stuttering, always falsely laughing Susanna Reid. Yesterday Turnbull and the divorced woman with a new born who may have a BBC employee as father were fighting over a pillow. And, oh yeah, Declan "I've eaten plenty of" Curry was reporting from someone's loft when he should have been giving us the business news.
Anyone get the very slight distinct impression that this programme is dumbing down? Mind you, it's produced by BBC News, who also make the 'Six O Clock News', which started tonight with two presenters giggling. Then at 6.10 (yes - 10 mins into the 30 min bulletin) something else got the presenters into a laughter.
Stella offered to make Ben another hot drink. The writer thought she was hilarious when Honey mispronounced a word. And, oh yeah - Max had booked a hotel for him and Stacey.
So nothing much happened. Just like the last episode. And the one before that. And all the others that I can possibly remember before that. So for that reason only, I am going to start drifting away from EastEnders. I will probably watch the occasional episode to see how things are progressing, and hopefully by this time next year, I'll have my life back. Hopefully.
Does anyone know whether the BBC is going to officially name any secondary presenters for the 1 and 6? I think they're little stint of mixing News 24 presenters with the nationals is ruining it. And are they going to make Emily deputy on the 1? She's been doing them every week for a long time now except for a few weeks ago (but that was because she was on the 10). I like both Emily and Jane Hill, but think that Jane Hill should get a regular job on BBC1 (maybe move Jane to the 1 and 6 on Fridays and weekends, and move Emily to Janes current slot?)
Its been about 5 months now since Darren Jordon left so I dont think we will see a fixed deputy for the one.
I wonder if Sian will return to cover for Natasha on the six now she back? In the last month or so we have seen many different stand-in presenters (Dermot, Jane, Ben, Jon).
And I dont understand why the BBC has been getting presenters like Ben Brown in, he's just terrible! I think a part-relaunch of presenting teams is needed.
I would...
put Bill Turnball as co-anchor of Breakfast (with Charlie Stayt in Secondary position)
Find Dermot Murngham (ignore my spelling please) a new job, possibly his own program (perhaps on News 24)
George Alagiah on the six with Sian or Jane
Huw and Fiona on the ten (but so they continue until 11 on News 24 - Huw instead of the 5 where hes appauling and Fiona instead of Real Story)
Put Kate Silverton on Sussanna's current job on Breakfast
And maybe Emily on the 1
What does anyone think?
I'm not too sure about that. Here's what I'd do:
Put Bill Turnbull and Sian Williams as main presenters of Breakfast, with Charlie Stayt and Susanna Reid covering
Have Jon Sopel as main presenter of the 1, and Jane Hill as deputy
Put Moira Stuart and Dermot Murnaghan as main presenters of the 6, with either Sophie Raworth or Natasha Kaplinsky as deputies (these two would have new jobs on News 24 somewhere)
Keep Huw Edwards and Fiona Bruce on the 10, with Dermot as deputy. Huw would also continue to present at 5, and Fiona would contiune with Real Story.
Make Jane Hill main weekend presenter, with either Moira or Louise Minchin covering
Banksoriginal, if you look back to earlier posts, I actually DID enjoy this show a lot right up until 2002 when Louise Berridge made her grand entrance. Since then, it has just got gradually worse. Call me sad, but I actually still watch because I am a loyal fan, who will watch right until the end.
Over to tonights episode, and without causing offence, what total bullocks. Stacey dressing up as Jane Eyre was NOT funny, Comic Relief night in the Queen Vic just goes to prove even further how right-on this show is, and the bit at the end was just disgusting and pathetic. Why didn't Ben scream? And why on earth did Tanya believe Stella? Can't she see by just looking at her that she's a few pennies short of a pound? The only consolation was the end credits.
The helpline at the end aswell. Was that to ring incase you were affected by the storyline, or because you were affected by Honey's stupid hair style?
This Wicks storyline is so intriguing. And even this is starting to form another love triangle. It must be what, 43rd in the last year? Dawn/May Rob. My goodness! Back in 1994, I thought the Sharongate storyline was good, but this storyline will become a Steven Spielberg movie in about 10 years time. So well written, well acted, well directed. Stella/Ben. Ben told Abi, and now Stella doesn't like Ben. Will they or won't they make up? I better get some sleep tonight EastEnders, otherwise your dead!
put Bill Turnball as co-anchor of Breakfast (with Charlie Stayt in Secondary position)