ST
People don't watch soaps in the hope of seeing someone else leading exactly the same lives as themselves; they may as well just observe their own families.
However, in the case of the Peacocks, they are probably the sort of 'normal' pairing that most people would avoid, given half a chance, if they lived on the same street.
...and squeaky Ashley! Both of them have been in desperate need of a good slap for quite some time!
Getting rid of the Peacocks is not a good decision. They are the only
normal family
group living in the street now (besides the Websters but their kids are growing up), and it was good to see at least one family having a relatively normal life.
People don't watch soaps in the hope of seeing someone else leading exactly the same lives as themselves; they may as well just observe their own families.
However, in the case of the Peacocks, they are probably the sort of 'normal' pairing that most people would avoid, given half a chance, if they lived on the same street.
About time they got rid of squeeling Claire.
...and squeaky Ashley! Both of them have been in desperate need of a good slap for quite some time!
ST
I just think getting rid of a character because they can't think of any future storylines is just lazy writing, like I said about Emily, she's lived a quiet 'boring' life in the street for 50 years and on occasion had a story line, same with Rita
at least this time the actors are in agreement and want to move on, the legacy of Martha Longhurt / Lynne carole is part of corry's history which is hard to shift, the actress didn't want to leave and had to on the assumption of the producer that she could move onto better things and she never acted again, quite why they couldn't have just had her emigrate to Spain and leave the door open for her return I don't know.
at least this time the actors are in agreement and want to move on, the legacy of Martha Longhurt / Lynne carole is part of corry's history which is hard to shift, the actress didn't want to leave and had to on the assumption of the producer that she could move onto better things and she never acted again, quite why they couldn't have just had her emigrate to Spain and leave the door open for her return I don't know.
Last edited by stevek2 on 25 April 2010 9:22am
NI
RE: the Martha thing; I think it was more to do with the fact that Tim Aspinall, who was the youngest producer in Corrie's history, wanted to make his mark on the programme - which I think he viewed as old-fashioned (this was only 1964). He saw his chance to shake up the show and settled upon breaking up that trio of Ena, Minnie and Martha. In several Corrie books (especially those by Daran Little) there are mentions of the huge uproar among press and even cast - Violet Carson nearly quit herself after hearing Lynne Carol had been axed but someone high up at Granada talked her round (I can't remember who). The really bad thing is that he left after only a few months IIRC: all he'd managed to do was kill off a fairly popular character in a non-extravagant way and reduce the lively trio to a quite sad duet. Sending her to her relatives in Spain or Malaga (I forget which) would, like you say Steve, have sufficed. Ironically she outlived both Vi Carson and Margot Bryant by a few years despite them each having a longer run on the show than her. I think all producers since then have been careful not to emulate what Aspinall did to the show.
I just think getting rid of a character because they can't think of any future storylines is just lazy writing, like I said about Emily, she's lived a quiet 'boring' life in the street for 50 years and on occasion had a story line, same with Rita
at least this time the actors are in agreement and want to move on, the legacy of Martha Longhurt / Lynne carole is part of corry's history which is hard to shift, the actress didn't want to leave and had to on the assumption of the producer that she could move onto better things and she never acted again, quite why they couldn't have just had her emigrate to Spain and leave the door open for her return I don't know.
at least this time the actors are in agreement and want to move on, the legacy of Martha Longhurt / Lynne carole is part of corry's history which is hard to shift, the actress didn't want to leave and had to on the assumption of the producer that she could move onto better things and she never acted again, quite why they couldn't have just had her emigrate to Spain and leave the door open for her return I don't know.
RE: the Martha thing; I think it was more to do with the fact that Tim Aspinall, who was the youngest producer in Corrie's history, wanted to make his mark on the programme - which I think he viewed as old-fashioned (this was only 1964). He saw his chance to shake up the show and settled upon breaking up that trio of Ena, Minnie and Martha. In several Corrie books (especially those by Daran Little) there are mentions of the huge uproar among press and even cast - Violet Carson nearly quit herself after hearing Lynne Carol had been axed but someone high up at Granada talked her round (I can't remember who). The really bad thing is that he left after only a few months IIRC: all he'd managed to do was kill off a fairly popular character in a non-extravagant way and reduce the lively trio to a quite sad duet. Sending her to her relatives in Spain or Malaga (I forget which) would, like you say Steve, have sufficed. Ironically she outlived both Vi Carson and Margot Bryant by a few years despite them each having a longer run on the show than her. I think all producers since then have been careful not to emulate what Aspinall did to the show.
ST
Whilst Emily's storylines are few and far between these days, she was used more in the past. In her younger days she became a widow through murder and married a bigamist before settling down as the disapproving voice towards Percy and then Norris. She's the Street's permanent kind-hearted, God-bothering do-gooder; a role that would have to be given to someone else if she left.
I just think getting rid of a character because they can't think of any future storylines is just lazy writing, like I said about Emily, she's lived a quiet 'boring' life in the street for 50 years and on occasion had a story line, same with Rita.
Whilst Emily's storylines are few and far between these days, she was used more in the past. In her younger days she became a widow through murder and married a bigamist before settling down as the disapproving voice towards Percy and then Norris. She's the Street's permanent kind-hearted, God-bothering do-gooder; a role that would have to be given to someone else if she left.
PT
I remember the only line coming from Emily when I was a kid was "Oh Mr Sugden!" 
Anyway, Corrie is definitely in 'filler-mode' as I call it at the moment. The storyline with Kevin not finishing the brakes was terribly executed. I'm sure it's going to get better what with 'our-Tracy' returning, Blanche's funeral, Gail in Jail, Norris and Mary's trip etc. As for the Peacocks going, it's no major loss, they were quite boring characters in my opinion. However, I've already noticed "Who cares! Corrie is rubbish, EastEnders is the best!" comments flying out.
Anyway, Corrie is definitely in 'filler-mode' as I call it at the moment. The storyline with Kevin not finishing the brakes was terribly executed. I'm sure it's going to get better what with 'our-Tracy' returning, Blanche's funeral, Gail in Jail, Norris and Mary's trip etc. As for the Peacocks going, it's no major loss, they were quite boring characters in my opinion. However, I've already noticed "Who cares! Corrie is rubbish, EastEnders is the best!" comments flying out.
RM
According to Screws Of The World today (reputable source, I know), Julia Haworth and Stephen Arnold asked the new producer for a meaty storyline; upon doing so, it was then they found out their contracts were not going to be renewed.
I'm sad to say I've been watching Coro less recently, certainly wouldn't say EE is the best though. I think Doctors is my favourite soap at present, very under-rated in my view.
As for the Peacocks going, it's no major loss, they were quite boring characters in my opinion. However, I've already noticed "Who cares! Corrie is rubbish, EastEnders is the best!" comments flying out.
I'm sad to say I've been watching Coro less recently, certainly wouldn't say EE is the best though. I think Doctors is my favourite soap at present, very under-rated in my view.
JE
Quite a lot - her first husband was murdered, her second husband turned out to be a bigamist, she was almost murdered by Richard Hillman, then there was that storyline where her husband's killer returned. There have been others as well.
Jez
Founding member
I don't think the peacocks should go just because there is no story to move them forward, how many actual stories has Emily had in the last 50 years
Quite a lot - her first husband was murdered, her second husband turned out to be a bigamist, she was almost murdered by Richard Hillman, then there was that storyline where her husband's killer returned. There have been others as well.
JE
RE: the Martha thing; I think it was more to do with the fact that Tim Aspinall, who was the youngest producer in Corrie's history, wanted to make his mark on the programme - which I think he viewed as old-fashioned (this was only 1964). He saw his chance to shake up the show and settled upon breaking up that trio of Ena, Minnie and Martha. In several Corrie books (especially those by Daran Little) there are mentions of the huge uproar among press and even cast - Violet Carson nearly quit herself after hearing Lynne Carol had been axed but someone high up at Granada talked her round (I can't remember who). The really bad thing is that he left after only a few months IIRC: all he'd managed to do was kill off a fairly popular character in a non-extravagant way and reduce the lively trio to a quite sad duet. Sending her to her relatives in Spain or Malaga (I forget which) would, like you say Steve, have sufficed. Ironically she outlived both Vi Carson and Margot Bryant by a few years despite them each having a longer run on the show than her. I think all producers since then have been careful not to emulate what Aspinall did to the show.
It was a mistake to kill off Martha but Hilda who replaced her as the Rovers cleaner and street gossip was a far better character and the best of all time IMO. Jean Alexander is still alive and id love Hilda to return to the show but doubt she ever will.
Lynne Carol was a lot younger than Vi and Margot tho which is probabaly why she outlived them both.
Jez
Founding member
I just think getting rid of a character because they can't think of any future storylines is just lazy writing, like I said about Emily, she's lived a quiet 'boring' life in the street for 50 years and on occasion had a story line, same with Rita
at least this time the actors are in agreement and want to move on, the legacy of Martha Longhurt / Lynne carole is part of corry's history which is hard to shift, the actress didn't want to leave and had to on the assumption of the producer that she could move onto better things and she never acted again, quite why they couldn't have just had her emigrate to Spain and leave the door open for her return I don't know.
at least this time the actors are in agreement and want to move on, the legacy of Martha Longhurt / Lynne carole is part of corry's history which is hard to shift, the actress didn't want to leave and had to on the assumption of the producer that she could move onto better things and she never acted again, quite why they couldn't have just had her emigrate to Spain and leave the door open for her return I don't know.
RE: the Martha thing; I think it was more to do with the fact that Tim Aspinall, who was the youngest producer in Corrie's history, wanted to make his mark on the programme - which I think he viewed as old-fashioned (this was only 1964). He saw his chance to shake up the show and settled upon breaking up that trio of Ena, Minnie and Martha. In several Corrie books (especially those by Daran Little) there are mentions of the huge uproar among press and even cast - Violet Carson nearly quit herself after hearing Lynne Carol had been axed but someone high up at Granada talked her round (I can't remember who). The really bad thing is that he left after only a few months IIRC: all he'd managed to do was kill off a fairly popular character in a non-extravagant way and reduce the lively trio to a quite sad duet. Sending her to her relatives in Spain or Malaga (I forget which) would, like you say Steve, have sufficed. Ironically she outlived both Vi Carson and Margot Bryant by a few years despite them each having a longer run on the show than her. I think all producers since then have been careful not to emulate what Aspinall did to the show.
It was a mistake to kill off Martha but Hilda who replaced her as the Rovers cleaner and street gossip was a far better character and the best of all time IMO. Jean Alexander is still alive and id love Hilda to return to the show but doubt she ever will.
Lynne Carol was a lot younger than Vi and Margot tho which is probabaly why she outlived them both.
SE
Square Eyes
Founding member
I agree with the Peacock axing. Take them out and they won't really be missed, so a good opportunity to try something different.
As I see it, the Barlows, Platts, Websters and McDonald clans are sacrosanct - the backbone of the show.
I'd put the oldies in there as well. They define Corrie - regardless of whether they get a storyline - they are always good value for filler / comedy etc.
The new producer needs to look at the role of Kirk. Past his sell by date if you ask me. Surplus to requirements now that they have Graham.
As I see it, the Barlows, Platts, Websters and McDonald clans are sacrosanct - the backbone of the show.
I'd put the oldies in there as well. They define Corrie - regardless of whether they get a storyline - they are always good value for filler / comedy etc.
The new producer needs to look at the role of Kirk. Past his sell by date if you ask me. Surplus to requirements now that they have Graham.