TV Home Forum

EastEnders - General Discussion Thread

22 years and still going strong... (March 2006)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
:-(
A former member
Well Coronation Street has managed to do it better. We've had Cilla, Tracy, Clare - they are the new woman of the street, yet they have managed to keep the quality of the older folk which initally made Corrie what it is.

With EastEnders, those older archetipal characters have gone, now i personally dont want to recreate another Dot, Pauline, Ethel, Angie and so on. I would like the new woman of EE we have now, Jane, May, Tanya ect.

Ok, i know the writing is not top notch, but my point is that the type of characters we have now and the way the are / act are different to the days of the 80s early 90s.
ST
Stuart
onetrickpony posted:
Also it takes years before a character becomes properly accepted with a believeable redeeming feature.

But it shouldn't be the case with well written multiple storylines for new characters. This enables the viewer to gain quite an insight into a character after only a few months.

EE tends to either bring back old stereotypes (Phil, Grant etc) or produce one-dimensional/one-storyline characters and then flog them to death.
DA
David_02
Banksoriginal posted:
We've heard it all before but if that we're Corrie it would be the funniest thing ever to hit planet earth,Don't you people understand that gets boring?

Take Cilla's Getaway in a scooter last year if that happened in EastEnders the writers would never live it down but because it happened in Carrie on its water under the bridge


Oh, the old 'if it waz on Corrie youd fink it waz great!' argument.

Not really. All I'm saying is that when it comes to comedy, EastEnders are rubbish. I think the difference between the two as well is that Corrie's humour tends to be much more subtle. Witty one liners here and there. Whereas with EE it's terribly contrived.

Having said that, they are obviously weak in drama as well. EastEnders was really top notch right up until 2001/2002. Then it just went downhill. EastEnders survived without the comedy because the drama was so good and was streets ahead of Corrie for years. But there is just no way that you can defend the show in its current state. It really is awful right now.
JC
JCB
02cashindavid posted:
[ I think the difference between the two as well is that Corrie's humour tends to be much more subtle. Witty one liners here and there. Whereas with EE it's terribly contrived.


Corrie's humour is neither "witty" nor "subtle". It's only one step away from being pointed out with a big flashing neon sign. Rolling Eyes
DA
David_02
JCB posted:
02cashindavid posted:
[ I think the difference between the two as well is that Corrie's humour tends to be much more subtle. Witty one liners here and there. Whereas with EE it's terribly contrived.


Corrie's humour is neither "witty" nor "subtle". It's only one step away from being pointed out with a big flashing neon sign. Rolling Eyes


Needless to say, I disagree.
PT
Put The Telly On
JCB posted:
02cashindavid posted:
[ I think the difference between the two as well is that Corrie's humour tends to be much more subtle. Witty one liners here and there. Whereas with EE it's terribly contrived.


Corrie's humour is neither "witty" nor "subtle". It's only one step away from being pointed out with a big flashing neon sign. Rolling Eyes


Its clever scripting. Steve McDonald for example has been fantastic recently. You are wrong my friend.
JC
JCB
nok32uk posted:
JCB posted:
02cashindavid posted:
[ I think the difference between the two as well is that Corrie's humour tends to be much more subtle. Witty one liners here and there. Whereas with EE it's terribly contrived.


Corrie's humour is neither "witty" nor "subtle". It's only one step away from being pointed out with a big flashing neon sign. Rolling Eyes


Its clever scripting. Steve McDonald for example has been fantastic recently. You are wrong my friend.


What's so clever about it?
PT
Put The Telly On
JCB posted:
nok32uk posted:
JCB posted:
02cashindavid posted:
[ I think the difference between the two as well is that Corrie's humour tends to be much more subtle. Witty one liners here and there. Whereas with EE it's terribly contrived.


Corrie's humour is neither "witty" nor "subtle". It's only one step away from being pointed out with a big flashing neon sign. Rolling Eyes


Its clever scripting. Steve McDonald for example has been fantastic recently. You are wrong my friend.


What's so clever about it?


What a silly question?
JC
JCB
What's so silly about it.? I keep reading corrie's writing is so "clever" and "witty". I just want someone to tell me the reason they think this.

The fact that no one has speaks volumes. Rolling Eyes
GS
Gavin Scott Founding member
JCB posted:
What's so silly about it.? I keep reading corrie's writing is so "clever" and "witty". I just want someone to tell me the reason they think this.

The fact that no one has speaks volumes. Rolling Eyes


Whats the matter with you? Do you think that this is some kind conspiratorial excercise that we are all engaged in?

I could give you examples - like when Steve was drunk in the Rovers after hours and wanted to know if Sean thought he was fat. Funny scene, tenderly played. The subtext of the action was that Sean knew that Michelle's new relationship was on shaky ground because of Sonny's sexual proclivities.

Its pointless recounting those moments to you if you (A) didn't watch, or (B) don't get the subtlety of it.

So which is it?
BA
Banksoriginal
To be Fair that does sound really funny....
MD
Mr D'Arcy
And now on BBC1 an hour of misery and woe, yes it's EastEnders Wink

Newer posts