Sunday, January 4, 2015

New Year's Week: The Three Witches of Walford - Review:- 30.12.2014

Was that a brilliant episode? (Already, I imagine Shamelessness's eyes wide in disbelief that I'd actually asked a rhetorical question. Quite simply, it was. Totally. Great pacing, good acting, tension maintained just right, good thematic linking ... I was even glad to see Kim return.

The let-down was that there is yet another baby on the way to Walford. DTC might not be that keen on teens, but he loves babies, and Walford has them in abundance since his arrival. He's a veritable stork. There are the Moon twins, Cindy's baby, Linda's baby, Ronnie's baby and now Kim is pregnant. Six babies since his return.

Slightly de trop? Stiil, if the quality of the recent episodes is maintained, I won't mind the baby boom so much,

The Psycopath at the Breakfast Table.



As the wedding approaches, Ronnie's psychopathy is running rampant, particularly her cack-handed attempts to remove Nick from the Cotton family dynamic with her as the head of the household. Is Charlie that blindly in love with this woman that he cannot see that she doesn't love him? First, she isn't taking his name, next she announces that her baby will have the double-barrelled name of Mitchell-Cotton.

Pretentious much? 

For a peculiar reason, it reminded me of Cilla and Les in Coronation Street deciding that Ches-neh would henceforth be Chesney Battersby-Brown. Funny haha, but with Ronnie, this takes on a sinister bend - as if a double-barrelled surname would raise the child of an psychopath with EastEnd gangster roots and a bog cleaner, whose father was a junkie, a petty criminal and murderer.

And even though Ronnie's successfully managed to de-ball Charlie and keep his testicles in aspic until such a time as she wants to be sexually satisfied, and then she'd let him have them back for the seven minutes or whatever it takes to achieve climax, Charlie's a fool not to see that she doesn't love him. She's incapable of loving anyone. Were it not for this baby, one of two obsessions with psychopathic Ronnie, she'd be ueber-controlling Roxy's affair wit Aleks, because Roxy's her other obsession.

So she's after the money Phil stole from Roxy? The money Shirley revelled in having to such an extent that she and Phil rolled around on the notes spread over their bed. This is the money that wasreturned surreptitiously to Roxy by Phil via Masood, in such a way that Roxy was led to believe Glenda had stolen the dosh, after Glenda sussed Phil had stolen what was essentially the last of Roxy's inheritance from Archie.

Even then, that was money raised by Roxy and Alfie, selling off luxury items Roxy had squandered the money on, when she suddenly realised at the eleventh hour that she had no money for which to fund Ronnie's wedding to Jack.

And it was never 100 grand. Instead, it was a mere 25 grand. What Ronnie was asking for was super-annuated interest.

I'm surprised Phil didn't come clean to her and tell her how he'd set her mother up. Instead, he referenced what a scumbag her father was, reminding her that she wanted nothing to do with him, and made the prime mistake of admitting that 100 grand was roughly the amount he kept in his safes.

However, Ronnie took more than 100 grand off Phil last year. She took precisely £950,000, the price Mick Carter paid for the Vic, with a promise, when she returned and Phil had found out about her murdering Carl White, that she would repay the lot. Instead, she's bought a house and the boxing club, the profits of which are dubious.

I had to sit up straight and gag a maggot when Ronnie said Phil owed her the money. Really, Veronica? I seem to recall a debt you owe Phil to the tune of nearly a million quid, and you left murder evidence in Phil's kitchen as collateral. You have yet to pay for killing Carl.

Phil really doesn't like either of the blisters, but he knows Ronnie for what she is, and quite frankly, he's none too impressed with her.

Phil owes Ronnie - that's the measure of this psychopath's arrogance and entitlement. Phil had the perfect line with which to dismiss the bitch:-

The only thing I owe you is that cup of tea, and that's only because you're family.

Well, you know, you can't choose your relatives.

One of EastEnders' stock scenes is the dinner party from hell, and the Cotton-Mitchell or Mitchell-Cotton luncheon party was well representative of two families who wouldn't cross the street to acknowledge each other. Dot was smart. If the invitation to a party at Jim's care home wasn't a reality, she was certainly smart to invent it.

No points for guessing that this was all an elaborate ruse on Ronnie's behalf to gain access to Phil's keys and nick the money she reckons is rightfully hers. 

Now ... wait a moment. If this is truly the money Phil stole from Roxy (before the obvious retcon), then surely the money belongs to Roxy?

Ronnie still thinks Nick can be bought, and it isn't the fact that Nick faked his death and risks exposing himself as well as Dot, Charlie and Yvonne to what is essentially fraud. Ronnie is worried about the position of power and dominance Nick holds in the Cotton dynamic, particularly with Charlie. If not for Nick's continued presence, Charlie wouldn't have deigned to reclaim his balls yesterday and hand Ronnie her ice-cold arse.

The truth is this: since he's been back in Walford, whether he's intentionally manipulated them as such or not, Dot, Yvonne and Charlie have enjoyed having Nick around. Of course, he's a bad'un, and it wouldn't be long before he was up to no good again, and maybe he was on his best behaviour just to enjoy the comfort of home again; but maybe he genuinely does have affection for his mother, his ex-wife and his son. Whatever he has, he most definitely has influence, and that influence would severely conflict Ronnie and her plans. It would certainly affect whatever domination she hoped to have over Charlie, and the scales have already fallen from Dot's eyes.

Nick knows exactly what Ronnie is, and her threat, referencing how mad and bad her daddy was and how she's capable of something more, rings hollow with a man who's killed twice and never been punished for either, who planned the death of another man and even tried to poison his mother. Compared to Nick, Ronnie is chicken shit.

Even with Phil's money, you knew Nick isn't going to leave, but it speaks volumes for Ronnie that she thinks so little of her guests that she buggers off from a luncheon, which seemed to last into the evening, leaving them to clean up.

Highlight of that part of the episode were the looks Yvonne and Sharon shot each other over the table. People go on about Letitia's camp style of acting, but no one does a subtle glance better than she.

Policewoman. Cue the music on an Emma Summerhayes spin-off. (TimWil, you'll appreciate this!)



Poor Emma. I actually like this character. She's lost her job, but she's dogged in her determination to crack the mystery of Lucy's killer, and she truly has to put up with a lot of shit from jumped up trailer trash like Lauren and the self-appointed moral arbitre of Walford, Jane.

Emma makes an innocent remark about Lucy:-

Emma: She looks like such a sweet girl, doesn't she?
Lauren: And what are you saying, that she weren't?


Actually, no, Lauren, she wasn't, as you aren't, You both shared a common trait in that you've both been appallingly brought up by your putrid parents, and your attitudes stink and stank - and it wouldn't go amiss if you bothered to use proper grammar when you're speaking.

Emma's on a roll, albeit innocently and inadvertantly. She's stumbled suddenly on the fact that Lauren and Max seem to bristle at the mention of Lucy. The truth is, in relation to Lauren, that Lucy really wasn't a nice person at all. Even Ian said that, at times, he didn't like her. And I'm sorry, but was Max giving his version of events to suit his own ego, because I seem to recall Lucy dumped Max, unceremoniously, in favour of Lee Carter, and on the night she died, she left Max with a few choice home truths. So Max didn't dump Lucy after a few weeks of madness (it was pure, unadulterated horniness on his part), and it wasn't he who said harsh things to her.

At heart and in mind, Emma is still a copper, and something about the behavioural patterns of the Beales and the Brannings - Emma's been brought up well, and it's probably the first time she's had to deal with the scrubbed-up great unwashed. The scene with Cindy was just weird, the bit about Lucy's presence being in the house. That reminded me of Steven Beale's cryptic visits to the Beale household before he made his presence known, leaving trace sprays of Cindy Beale's favourite scent. It also reminded me of that bum-clinchingly awful scene from the Range Rover in the Lake episode when Peter was in the water and Melissa Suffield's Lucy got psychic messages in the salon. (That was a Santer effort too).

I don't know if the tetchy reactions of the various members of the Beale-Branning gaggle were presented as red herrings, but it appears that they aren't in any hurry to promote the solution of Lucy's killing. They certainly haven't reported the music box gift to the police, but Jane was just despicable tonight in her condescension, looking at Emma as if she were a piece of shit and calling out Ian's puerile behaviour. I don't know if Emma intentionally sought to gauge a reaction to the music box mystery, but I did notice that Abi didn't show up, which could be a significant clue in reverse. The mention of the gift and Cindy's unease at its presence certainly struck a nerve with chez Beale, prompting Cindy to remember she left an infant at home, seemingly on her own.

Jane's a two-faced, judgemental bitch, and I sincerely hope she is unveiled as the killer. Since Emma's been sacked from the case and the Beales willingly witheld evidence from the police, there's been no action or progress in the case, and Ian now seems distracted by his impending marriage to Jane, which means he can sleep soundly in his Oedipal bed and nurse her ample bosom. In fact, it almost seems as if the Beales are afraid to find out just who did kill Lucy.

The Return of the Native and the Queen of Scrotes Tie It Up.



First things first ... she's back. Kim. I never thought I'd be glad to see her because I always thought her not funny, but she did make me smile. One small niggle: When Carly returned briefly two years ago, Kim greeted her with an exclamation that Carly had come to see "Auntie Kim," presuming that the two were familiar. There were certainly enough references to "Auntie Kim" when Kevin and Denise were married, and it can be assumed that the Wicks kids met her. If so, why didn't she recognise Dean?

More to the point, Tameka Empson's reaction to Denise's current state and to Patrick's altered state brought a tear to my eye. This was a different Kim - not the lazy one who left Denise to do all the heavy work, this was Kim pitching in with the cleaning, when she wasn't wondering if she'd landed in some parallel universe judging by the way Walford had changed since she'd gone.

The husband got a brief mention - he's abroad, making money, meaning something's amiss and we'll see him anon, I suppose. I did wonder why she kept wearing her full-length coat until the end when her baby bump was revealed - kinda ironic, considering Empson left abruptly more than a year ago on maternity leave and returns to play a pregnant lady.

I even liked her reunion with Shirley, who's managed to fanagle her way back into helping run the pub, due to Mick having left Nancy, instead of Lee, in charge. Bad Mick for not remembering that a licencee had to be on the premises at all times, but I do seem to recall Peggy being gone for extended periods when staff were serving, and didn't Kat and Alfie leave (or was it Alfie and Roxy) Fatboy in charge of the pub? Maybe that was a lie, taking advantage of Nancy's naivete, but you'd think that Mick would be more helpful to her regarding stock-taking. Shirley is never one to use a vulnerable situation to her advantage, and she's taking advantage of Nancy's insecurity at being at the helm to worm her way back into the business.

I hated that smug line to Kim ~ I guess you haven't noticed my name above the door.~ Said three times, and Kim still wouldn't believe her. Yeah, Shirley, your name above the door, your 1/100th share in the pub, your mistreatment of your son's life partner. Now you undermine Mick's strict orders to Nancy - to keep Shirley and Dean away from the Vic. Ah, but Nancy needs Nanna Shirley to help her with the stock take, especially after she diffused the situation boiling over between Kim and Ian, which was a pip.

Kim was right in everything she said to Ian. When she left Walford, Denise was fine. She's back, to find Denise in a state because of the way Ian messed with her head, and there in the background was that bovine bitch piping up ~ Ian didn't mess with her head, Ian didn't mess with her head ~ in a way that denoted that Ian's shit smells like Chanel No 5. Shut up, Jane. Because not only did Ian mess with Denise's head, you did as well, by undermining her position in the household, by treating her as "the help" and by not even having the common courtesy to admit to Denise's face that she and Ian had had sex whilst Ian was still engaged to Denise. Instead, she focused on Masood, whom she betrayed. I was hoping for Kim to smack Jane's smug face and Ian's wobble-chops as well.

There's something really rotten amongst the Beales and Brannings.

And then the penny dropped.

Something stirred Emma, and it was Dean bursting in with these words:-

Patrick's had a fall. I was only out of the room five minutes.

That jogged something in Emma's mind - something related to the video, which she still has on her phone, of Lauren outside the Beale house that night. Outside the pub, she looks from the Trueman-Fox abode, with Kim, Denise and Dean disappearing inside, to the Beales leaving in the direction of their home, to Emma's left, and back to the pink door of Number 27, where the Blisters live and where there was a party in full swing that night.

There's some connection, as she rushed home to examine the contents of her investigation file. Is it to do with the scene of Lauren at the Beales', meaning that whoever took that video was standing across the Square to capture Lauren. The key is in the phrase "I was only out of the room five minutes". Someone left the party, and it took all of five minutes to kill Lucy? Five minutes gone and no one noticed an absence?

The fact that she hid the file (which Max will no doubt find and destroy) and the fact that she wasn't keen on confronting either Max or Lauren means the killer, whom she called, is close to the Branning dynamic, if not within it, itself.

The fateful words have been spoken:-

I know you killed Lucy Beale.

But who?

Coda: The other notable line went to Mrs Doyle: This had better be the George Clooney of desserts.

Great episode and great ending credits ... "brought to you by" ... well, everyone who's appeared this year, with the special "In Memoriam" dedication to those who passed. Nice touch.

No comments:

Post a Comment