You can tell that the schools are out, because all the toeraggy little spermwanks start crawling from the woodwork on Digital Spy.
A loathsome little sprog called DUNDEEBOY writes on Digital Spy:-
EastEnders was never ever supposed to be a niche soap. It was never designed to appeal to younger viewers at all. In fact, if Bonnie Prince Charlie would care to look at some of the archived episodes on YouTube from the 1980s, you'd see the only young characters at that time were Michelle, Sharon, Ian, Kelvin and (for a time) Mark. The teenaged characters changed from decade to decade, as others aged and left the show (Sue Tully and Letitia Dean stayed with their roles for ten years, leaving as young women in their late twenties), but the brat packs were never the dominant force.
The Nineties had Ricky, Bianca, Natalie and - from time to time - Sam Mitchell. In fact, her last two stints during the 1990s saw Sam having relationships with no less than David Wicks and Beppe DiMarco, both men in their thirties.
Sonia, Jamie and Martin came to the fore after that.
But the main action and storylines revolved around characters between the ages of 25 to mid-fifties. The focal points originally were Arthur and Pauline, Den and Angie, Pete and Kath, the Osmans - all characters in their thirties and forties. Frank and Pat were the power couple of the Nineties, then Peggy took centre stage. The big couple at the turn of the Century was Mel and Steve.
It's only until recently, starting with Kirkwood and continuing with Newman, that the balance was skewed, and the show was overstocked with a plethora of Brannings and scores of unlikeable, entitled, directionless and pejoratively moulded "yoof", most of whom were hired on the basis of their looks and with no talent. Look back at anyone from the 80s or 90s, even Natalie Cassidy ... these kids were ordinary, and would have no place today amongst the flawlessly-skinned Poppy, the collagened and boobed-up Lauren, the anorexic ex-catalogue model who paws at being Lucy or the tangoed conehead pretending to be Whitney. Don't start me on the underwear model David Witts.
In fact, the likes of Sue Tully would be played as a sad clown to be pitied; Adam Woodyatt's Ian Beale is still seen as someone to be firmly "put in his place" and who's punching above his weight with his latest patronising girlfriend.
The imbalance of "yoof" domination occurred and was pushed by Kirwood for two reasons - because he was more attuned to working with and promoting younger actors as a result of his Hollyoaks background and such actors are cheaper in the budget-conscious atmosphere prevalent on EastEnders. Why pay for good actors when you can hold the diminishing attention spans of the lowest common denominator of viewers with a million-pound stunt?
In short, the balance does need to be redressed. This is not a soap designed for teenagers and pre-adolescents. It's not a niche soap for the Club 18-30 set either. And because of the preponderance of untalented eye candy running about, EastEnders has lost its identity and its brand amongst the core of loyal viewers who've watched the soap from day one or at least since the Nineties.
The show didn't begin with the Slaters or Stacey Slater, and it certainly didn't begin in 2006 with the Brannings, and it certainly didn't begin in 2010 with the recast of Lauren Branning with the awful excuse of an actress, Jacqueline Jossa.
Dominic Treadwell Collins needs to address this when his tenure begins at the end of the month. For EastEnders, it's now time either to shit or get off the pot. Aim to attract the departing long-term viewers or consign the current rubbish to the realms of CBBC.
Och aye ...
A loathsome little sprog called DUNDEEBOY writes on Digital Spy:-
In a one-word reply, Behave.Is eastenders mainproblems trying to please the younger and older viewers
It's a balance they can't get right
You look on youtube Lauren and Joey by some distance get more comments videos than probably the rest of the cast put together. The show is fine according these viewers
The young female viewers would probably storm elstree if Joey was axed.
However on here people say things like jean Gillian wright is a big loss to the show. Others want david and carol prominent when he returns etc. these factors are not significant to younger viewers.
I suppose the balance is somewhere between the two of these extremes.
Maybe the new producer will final the balance between these two extremes. Eastenders will always seen as having a younger audience but its original younger audience are in probably middle age now and these probably the ones moaning a lot yet it's their children who probably make up the younger audience
EastEnders was never ever supposed to be a niche soap. It was never designed to appeal to younger viewers at all. In fact, if Bonnie Prince Charlie would care to look at some of the archived episodes on YouTube from the 1980s, you'd see the only young characters at that time were Michelle, Sharon, Ian, Kelvin and (for a time) Mark. The teenaged characters changed from decade to decade, as others aged and left the show (Sue Tully and Letitia Dean stayed with their roles for ten years, leaving as young women in their late twenties), but the brat packs were never the dominant force.
The Nineties had Ricky, Bianca, Natalie and - from time to time - Sam Mitchell. In fact, her last two stints during the 1990s saw Sam having relationships with no less than David Wicks and Beppe DiMarco, both men in their thirties.
Sonia, Jamie and Martin came to the fore after that.
But the main action and storylines revolved around characters between the ages of 25 to mid-fifties. The focal points originally were Arthur and Pauline, Den and Angie, Pete and Kath, the Osmans - all characters in their thirties and forties. Frank and Pat were the power couple of the Nineties, then Peggy took centre stage. The big couple at the turn of the Century was Mel and Steve.
It's only until recently, starting with Kirkwood and continuing with Newman, that the balance was skewed, and the show was overstocked with a plethora of Brannings and scores of unlikeable, entitled, directionless and pejoratively moulded "yoof", most of whom were hired on the basis of their looks and with no talent. Look back at anyone from the 80s or 90s, even Natalie Cassidy ... these kids were ordinary, and would have no place today amongst the flawlessly-skinned Poppy, the collagened and boobed-up Lauren, the anorexic ex-catalogue model who paws at being Lucy or the tangoed conehead pretending to be Whitney. Don't start me on the underwear model David Witts.
In fact, the likes of Sue Tully would be played as a sad clown to be pitied; Adam Woodyatt's Ian Beale is still seen as someone to be firmly "put in his place" and who's punching above his weight with his latest patronising girlfriend.
The imbalance of "yoof" domination occurred and was pushed by Kirwood for two reasons - because he was more attuned to working with and promoting younger actors as a result of his Hollyoaks background and such actors are cheaper in the budget-conscious atmosphere prevalent on EastEnders. Why pay for good actors when you can hold the diminishing attention spans of the lowest common denominator of viewers with a million-pound stunt?
In short, the balance does need to be redressed. This is not a soap designed for teenagers and pre-adolescents. It's not a niche soap for the Club 18-30 set either. And because of the preponderance of untalented eye candy running about, EastEnders has lost its identity and its brand amongst the core of loyal viewers who've watched the soap from day one or at least since the Nineties.
The show didn't begin with the Slaters or Stacey Slater, and it certainly didn't begin in 2006 with the Brannings, and it certainly didn't begin in 2010 with the recast of Lauren Branning with the awful excuse of an actress, Jacqueline Jossa.
Dominic Treadwell Collins needs to address this when his tenure begins at the end of the month. For EastEnders, it's now time either to shit or get off the pot. Aim to attract the departing long-term viewers or consign the current rubbish to the realms of CBBC.
Och aye ...
No comments:
Post a Comment