BR
Have to agree on that, I really don't see what people have against Enders, yes the scripts and stories have been **** poor of late, some of the actors are wooden but give it a chance to turn around. If its still in the same state at the end of the year, then yes it should be put out of its misery.
But EE has been in decline for over two years now - just how long should it be given to turn itself around?
It shows no signs of improvement - and if bosses believe the only way to improve things is to bring back old characters (that worked so well with Dirty Den didn't it!) why not just repeat episodes from a decade again. Most people I talk to don't want to see the likes of the Mitchells return, don't want anymore gangsters and aren't interested in stories such as the Sharron / Dennis / Zoe / Den saga.
If EastEnders is to stay on screen it needs a major revamp, with virtually all characters being axed. They need to begin looking to the future, not the past.
And the BBC now need to consider what is in the best interests of BBC1, not the EastEnders cast. Axing EastEnders could pave the way for a number of new prime time drama series to be created (some would work, some would fail!) which could form the centrepiece of a new and improved BBC1 primetime schedule!
TVF posted:
02cashindavid posted:
The chances of the BBC axing it's highest rated show across all of it's channels are very slim, instead of giving up, they are going to work hard and change it for the better. Remember when Coronation Street had it's bad patch, then it bounced back with one of the biggest and most memorable storylines ever (Tricky Dicky). EastEnders will change, and most likely be bigger and better than ever.
Have to agree on that, I really don't see what people have against Enders, yes the scripts and stories have been **** poor of late, some of the actors are wooden but give it a chance to turn around. If its still in the same state at the end of the year, then yes it should be put out of its misery.
But EE has been in decline for over two years now - just how long should it be given to turn itself around?
It shows no signs of improvement - and if bosses believe the only way to improve things is to bring back old characters (that worked so well with Dirty Den didn't it!) why not just repeat episodes from a decade again. Most people I talk to don't want to see the likes of the Mitchells return, don't want anymore gangsters and aren't interested in stories such as the Sharron / Dennis / Zoe / Den saga.
If EastEnders is to stay on screen it needs a major revamp, with virtually all characters being axed. They need to begin looking to the future, not the past.
And the BBC now need to consider what is in the best interests of BBC1, not the EastEnders cast. Axing EastEnders could pave the way for a number of new prime time drama series to be created (some would work, some would fail!) which could form the centrepiece of a new and improved BBC1 primetime schedule!
GS
Gavin Scott
Founding member
Brekkie Boy, change the bleedin record.
I've been both a long standing fan and one of the show's harshest critics of late, but frankly only an idiot would suggest that the BBC axe their consistently highest rating show.
The fact that they are moving through exec producer after exec producer indicates that they *know* the show needs improvement. It will happen, just as it happened for Corrie. Two years may seem an endlessly long time for you, but the show has been on the air for 20 years, and I assume they are planning for 20 more.
I've been both a long standing fan and one of the show's harshest critics of late, but frankly only an idiot would suggest that the BBC axe their consistently highest rating show.
The fact that they are moving through exec producer after exec producer indicates that they *know* the show needs improvement. It will happen, just as it happened for Corrie. Two years may seem an endlessly long time for you, but the show has been on the air for 20 years, and I assume they are planning for 20 more.
KA
It's official - I'm an idiot!
An idiot that paradoxically craves more intelligent television programming from broadcasting companies.
When I am tired and bored of the vast and nearly uncountable beauties, sights, sounds, peoples, history, geology, archaeology, inventions and fascinations of the real world, maybe I'll then think for a short moment about donating soaps, dramas, Big Brother, Simon Cowell, X Factor, Pap Idol, I'm a Celebrity and sitcoms a nanosecond of my time.
Until then, I must go and finish a chapter of the science book I'm reading and browse the latest National Geographic magazine before bedtime.....
Katherine
Founding member
Gavin Scott posted:
I've been both a long standing fan and one of the show's harshest critics of late, but frankly only an idiot would suggest that the BBC axe their consistently highest rating show.
It's official - I'm an idiot!
An idiot that paradoxically craves more intelligent television programming from broadcasting companies.
When I am tired and bored of the vast and nearly uncountable beauties, sights, sounds, peoples, history, geology, archaeology, inventions and fascinations of the real world, maybe I'll then think for a short moment about donating soaps, dramas, Big Brother, Simon Cowell, X Factor, Pap Idol, I'm a Celebrity and sitcoms a nanosecond of my time.
Until then, I must go and finish a chapter of the science book I'm reading and browse the latest National Geographic magazine before bedtime.....
SE
It's official - I'm an idiot!
An idiot that paradoxically craves more intelligent television programming from broadcasting companies.
When I am tired and bored of the vast and nearly uncountable beauties, sights, sounds, peoples, history, geology, archaeology, inventions and fascinations of the real world, maybe I'll then think for a short moment about donating soaps, dramas, Big Brother, Simon Cowell, X Factor, Pap Idol, I'm a Celebrity and sitcoms a nanosecond of my time.
Until then, I must go and finish a chapter of the science book I'm reading and browse the latest National Geographic magazine before bedtime.....
Oh for heavens sake, don't get all self righteous and pompous on us. For your information, there are those of us that do a job of work, that keep this nation of ours running, and get plenty of stimulation doing so thank you very much.
Many just want to come home and disengage the brain for a short while, and watch some mindless drivel, it's an escape, and it has it's place. Is that such a bad thing ?
Tell us when you've tried it.
Square Eyes
Founding member
Katherine posted:
Gavin Scott posted:
I've been both a long standing fan and one of the show's harshest critics of late, but frankly only an idiot would suggest that the BBC axe their consistently highest rating show.
It's official - I'm an idiot!
An idiot that paradoxically craves more intelligent television programming from broadcasting companies.
When I am tired and bored of the vast and nearly uncountable beauties, sights, sounds, peoples, history, geology, archaeology, inventions and fascinations of the real world, maybe I'll then think for a short moment about donating soaps, dramas, Big Brother, Simon Cowell, X Factor, Pap Idol, I'm a Celebrity and sitcoms a nanosecond of my time.
Until then, I must go and finish a chapter of the science book I'm reading and browse the latest National Geographic magazine before bedtime.....
Oh for heavens sake, don't get all self righteous and pompous on us. For your information, there are those of us that do a job of work, that keep this nation of ours running, and get plenty of stimulation doing so thank you very much.
Many just want to come home and disengage the brain for a short while, and watch some mindless drivel, it's an escape, and it has it's place. Is that such a bad thing ?
Tell us when you've tried it.
GS
Gavin Scott
Founding member
Why is this an either/or? Kat, your craving for intellectual, educational and inspirational programming is perfectly sound. You can find that within the BBC schedules across their channels, as well as on the niche channels provided in your multi channel home.
EastEnders has, in its time, been a paradigm of wonderfully produced continuing drama. It's not a documentary or educational programme, of course not. You are comparing apples with oranges, and it serves neither.
You know Katherine, you also enjoy the froth and banter of your local news programming, so it seems your tastes are broader than you perhaps think.
EastEnders has, in its time, been a paradigm of wonderfully produced continuing drama. It's not a documentary or educational programme, of course not. You are comparing apples with oranges, and it serves neither.
You know Katherine, you also enjoy the froth and banter of your local news programming, so it seems your tastes are broader than you perhaps think.
KA
What would be so wrong with using the assets and attractions of a far-off place in the world (perhaps the quietness and peace of outer space) with a radically different way of life, landscape, culture, language and history as a means of escapism?
Katherine
Founding member
Square Eyes posted:
Many just want to come home and disengage the brain for a short while, and watch some mindless drivel, it's an escape, and it has it's place. Is that such a bad thing ?
What would be so wrong with using the assets and attractions of a far-off place in the world (perhaps the quietness and peace of outer space) with a radically different way of life, landscape, culture, language and history as a means of escapism?
SE
What would be so wrong with using the assets and attractions of a far-off place in the world (perhaps the quietness and peace of outer space) with a radically different way of life, landscape, culture, language and history as a means of escapism?
Duh, but I can't keep up to date with the latest on Sally Webster's affair in space can I ?
Anyway Kat, isn't there a National Geographic by your bedside table beckoning you ?
Square Eyes
Founding member
Katherine posted:
What would be so wrong with using the assets and attractions of a far-off place in the world (perhaps the quietness and peace of outer space) with a radically different way of life, landscape, culture, language and history as a means of escapism?
Duh, but I can't keep up to date with the latest on Sally Webster's affair in space can I ?
Anyway Kat, isn't there a National Geographic by your bedside table beckoning you ?
KA
Katherine
Founding member
EastEnders has, in its time, been a paradigm of wonderfully produced continuing drama.
What I find so offputting about soaps is that they so infrequently realistivally represent and depict the area they're set in with any trace of reality whatsoever. Each one always seems to overdepend on sensationalist storylines like people returning from the dead, the typical 'who bonked who' stories, one-night-stands where the relationships between the characters are so complicated and far-fetched it's ridiculous! What's even more annoying about them is that page after page of newspaper is polluted by this nonsense, to the detriment of those that actually want a newspaper to do what it says on the tin and actually report news rather than speculiative sensationalism! Desperately trying to keep soaps and reality TV series going seems to me only feeds this odd mind-set that these shows HAVE to be kept going otherwise Armageddon will arrive in all its glory, and that television without soaps is too radical a concept for them to grasp.
Even when a gritty storyline is included, emotion and sensationalism all-too-often obscure the communication of the facts, whys and wherefores of the gritty circumstance under the spotlight. It drives me crazy sitting there with the soap not providing the depth of information I like from a situation like it. I don't want to see protracted, long, boring scenes where people are crying and shouting about the misfortune of another person with an increasingly intolerable tone of voice. By all means include emotion, the odd crying scene but not overdo that emotion to saturation point and beyond! It just gets so boring! This is where documentaries are better - there'll be one shot of the parents of a child about to have surgery for example crying and being comforted and then hug over-and-done-with, into the operation and life carries on....
Reality TV so often creates 'celebrities' like Lizzy Bardsley who is famous for all the wrong reasons, and then producers seem obsessed with seeing how many shows they can make out of people like her, Maureen from Driving School and Jade Goody. And then the magazines feature them and not people who are famous for the right reasons and a result of pure talent in one field or another, like Michael Palin and John Cleese.
I am just fed up with every tabloid, television programme listings magazine, woman's magazine etc... stuffed to obesity-like proportions with reality TV, soaps, sitcoms etc and the ridiculous lengths producers go to to get viewers back with ridiculous, desperate and pathetic storyline twists (return of Den, Grant etc) that challenge the borders of credibility and logic.
What I find so offputting about soaps is that they so infrequently realistivally represent and depict the area they're set in with any trace of reality whatsoever. Each one always seems to overdepend on sensationalist storylines like people returning from the dead, the typical 'who bonked who' stories, one-night-stands where the relationships between the characters are so complicated and far-fetched it's ridiculous! What's even more annoying about them is that page after page of newspaper is polluted by this nonsense, to the detriment of those that actually want a newspaper to do what it says on the tin and actually report news rather than speculiative sensationalism! Desperately trying to keep soaps and reality TV series going seems to me only feeds this odd mind-set that these shows HAVE to be kept going otherwise Armageddon will arrive in all its glory, and that television without soaps is too radical a concept for them to grasp.
Even when a gritty storyline is included, emotion and sensationalism all-too-often obscure the communication of the facts, whys and wherefores of the gritty circumstance under the spotlight. It drives me crazy sitting there with the soap not providing the depth of information I like from a situation like it. I don't want to see protracted, long, boring scenes where people are crying and shouting about the misfortune of another person with an increasingly intolerable tone of voice. By all means include emotion, the odd crying scene but not overdo that emotion to saturation point and beyond! It just gets so boring! This is where documentaries are better - there'll be one shot of the parents of a child about to have surgery for example crying and being comforted and then hug over-and-done-with, into the operation and life carries on....
Reality TV so often creates 'celebrities' like Lizzy Bardsley who is famous for all the wrong reasons, and then producers seem obsessed with seeing how many shows they can make out of people like her, Maureen from Driving School and Jade Goody. And then the magazines feature them and not people who are famous for the right reasons and a result of pure talent in one field or another, like Michael Palin and John Cleese.
I am just fed up with every tabloid, television programme listings magazine, woman's magazine etc... stuffed to obesity-like proportions with reality TV, soaps, sitcoms etc and the ridiculous lengths producers go to to get viewers back with ridiculous, desperate and pathetic storyline twists (return of Den, Grant etc) that challenge the borders of credibility and logic.
RT
rts
Founding member
Some breaking news from Digital Spy:
Two new faces are set to follow Johnny Allen (Bill Murray) to Walford in the coming months.
Johnny Allen will reveal that he has two women in his life - his girlfriend, Tina (Charlotte Avery) and daughter, Ruby (Louisa Lytton).
Although Tina knows that Johnny has a daughter, Ruby knows nothing of her father's partner and, unwilling to tell Ruby the truth, Johnny asks his girlfriend to take a back seat for a while - but she's not willing to let him go that easily...
Charlotte said: “I’m delighted to be joining EastEnders. I’ve watched the show since it first started and I never imagined that I would be propping up the bar in the Vic and asking Pat for a cup of tea! I’m really looking forward to building my on-screen relationship with Billy Murray, I think that he’s a fantastic actor.”
Louisa commented: “I’m nervous and excited all at the same time to be joining EastEnders. This is an amazing opportunity and I can’t believe that I’m going to be working alongside some of my favourite actors and actresses.”
Two new faces are set to follow Johnny Allen (Bill Murray) to Walford in the coming months.
Johnny Allen will reveal that he has two women in his life - his girlfriend, Tina (Charlotte Avery) and daughter, Ruby (Louisa Lytton).
Although Tina knows that Johnny has a daughter, Ruby knows nothing of her father's partner and, unwilling to tell Ruby the truth, Johnny asks his girlfriend to take a back seat for a while - but she's not willing to let him go that easily...
Charlotte said: “I’m delighted to be joining EastEnders. I’ve watched the show since it first started and I never imagined that I would be propping up the bar in the Vic and asking Pat for a cup of tea! I’m really looking forward to building my on-screen relationship with Billy Murray, I think that he’s a fantastic actor.”
Louisa commented: “I’m nervous and excited all at the same time to be joining EastEnders. This is an amazing opportunity and I can’t believe that I’m going to be working alongside some of my favourite actors and actresses.”
DA
I am sick and tired of hearing people complaining about TV shows they don't like. Then don't post in this thread, and don't watch the show. Simple.
Anyway, tonights episode was very good, and I really felt for Patrick. I am also warming to Sam, I'm glad she's not leaving just yet. But Zoes character is so aggravating. I wish she would just shut up, and the sooner Den is killed off, the sooner EastEnders can regain it's reputation as Britains No 1 soap.
Anyway, tonights episode was very good, and I really felt for Patrick. I am also warming to Sam, I'm glad she's not leaving just yet. But Zoes character is so aggravating. I wish she would just shut up, and the sooner Den is killed off, the sooner EastEnders can regain it's reputation as Britains No 1 soap.