National TV Awards

I have not watched Eastenders since Martine McCutcheon was run over .When the Slaters arrived that did it for me the charachters they introduce are just awful.

Look at those two Mitchell girls for example what the hell are they all about .Eastenders is dire .If only it could get back on track and have some more realistic charachters and some decent storylines i'm fed up of the gangsters and underworld connections . Call me boring but why can't we have some good old Angie and Den type storylines .I must admit now Patsy Palmer and Sid Owen are coming back that is a huge plus i may tune in again on a regular basis.

But as far as Corrie goes it's streets ahead pardon the pun .

most of the eastenders characters are complete bone heads anyway

I only watch the omnibus if I can't find owt better to do on a sunday afternoon

ARGH God! Did you ever bother reading my posts? The many arguements I had with Banksoriginal in the old EastEnders thread? The many times I tried to convince not only him that the show was dying on its arse and that the continuity flaws were hurrendous?!

For your information, no, I don't watch EastEnders now. I don't care if its going through a "good patch" or so to speak. For me its dead and buried. It's aiming at a different demographic now. I watched it reguarly for about 13 years until 2005 when it lost it completely. It was always must see TV for me, I used to be obsessed by the show as a kid.

Yes I'm going to defend Corrie in your pathetic little arguement because there is absolutely no competition - in my opinion - and I stress - in my opinion between the continuity in the two shows. Corrie pulls it all together where as EastEnders jumps in at the deep end hoping it can pull off a good storyline not caring whether its a good script or not. If EastEnders struggle their best response is to chuck more actors past or new into the situation instead of planning out what the next storyline should be etc. Planning out the storylines with the right balance of humour and drama is what Corrie does well, they can have some boring storylines, I'm not saying they don't, but they will write something else meantime. You can go from having a storyline such as Claire and Ashley's relationship problems and Casey to cutting to the Rovers and Norris and Rita humourously arguing about the price of postage stamps etc which can develop into Norris and Rita closing down the Post Office side of The Kabin (obviously thats a mock example but you instantly see another story developing). EE on the other hand, you can have Max and Stacey's affair and they'll cut to Minty ordering peanuts from the bar ....right....and then back to Max and Stacey's affair, then you'll see Minty throwing peanuts at Garry's car etc....wow thats funny. Again, another mock example but can you see what I'm getting at? Its all in the script delivery I suppose.

I'm not saying EastEnders didn't deserve to win (yes I would have loved to have seen Corrie get it) but I'm a little annoyed when people try and compare Corrie to EastEnders and that its equally as bad....rubbish.

Right - well I've watched Corrie consistently and EE regularly enough recently so I would say I am in a better position than you, a Corrie activist, to judge with a fair mind and level head the merits of storylines, scripts and show quality. Fun stuff.

Perhaps watch it again because you are basing your opinions on its quality circa 2005 which is quite frankly scandalous, considering how much it has improved. And you know how much I hated EE back then too.

You keep stressing that it's your opinion but seem to have a huge chip on your shoulder because someone else doesn't agree.

What would you do if I said I thought both shows were as bad as each other? shoot me?

But Corrie still didn't win the NTA then either, so this proves that all your long arguments about EastEnders deserving it this year and Corrie not are irrelevant. EastEnders win it most of the time regardless of the quality. They even won it the other year which was regarded as EastEnders worst year ever

Erm, I've never said the rewards are always indicative of quality. I was expecting Corrie to win because it usually does when it's undeserving; conversely EastEnders wins when it's undeserving, like in 2002-2004.

So my point stands and is not irrelevant - EastEnders deserved the award.

Oh I hate pointless arguements. So because I hate EastEnders now I'm a Corrie activist? Rubbish.

I gave up watching EastEnders because the continuity flopped BIG time. I shan't go back to watching it because it'll never be repaired in the long term and regardless of whether you think its improved or not is a matter of opinion. We'll agree to disagree.

Well thats your opinion. I'm just arguing my case. I do get frustrated as to why people don't agree I'll admit, but fair enough.

I may be being unkind here, but I think Trevor McDonald cannot deliver a gag at all!

It's a shame that POG fell out with ITV, because he would have been better at that sort of thing (as he was with the Soap Awards)

As for the Eastender v Coro awards, I think a large point in being missed-- viewing figures.

AIUI Coronation St has consistently beaten EE in the ratings in the last 12 months (I'm prepared to be corrected on that BTW).

Arguing on whether Coro or EE gets which awards is largely futile, surely ratings are the most accurate gauge of which is the most popular soap. Even the most award-laden executive keeps a eye on the audiences figures.

Some may be disheartened at Coro, but 10million people still frequently tune into the soap and appreciate it, and it is usually the UK's top-rated programme-- so it must be doing something right.

"Viewers please don't abandon us, we didn't know you were being ripped off-- honest!"