If last night was about all that was bad about EastEnders, tonight was all about what was the worst - and one of the absolute worsts about the programme at the moment is its inability to be consistent.
It's one thing to be consistently good; quite another, to be consistently bad. At least with one or the other, you'd have the wherewithal to judge a programme on its merits or its shortcomings, and 'consistently bad' would mean a short shelf life for the programme in question.
It's just that when Eastenders is good, it's very, very good, and when it's bad, it's absolute rubbish. At its best, the programme consisted of very good episodes and the occasional mediocre one. Over the past decade, the show has deteriorated until we now have a gaggle of mediocre episodes, with one or two brief good scenes, the occasional outstanding episode, and then a string of episodes with can only be described as pukeworthingly dire. The problem is that many viewers who have only started watching within the past decade actually think "mediocre" is good, and they take offence when someone of longer viewing mentality criticises the quality.
Jesus, tonight fell into the "pukeworthingly dire" category. You never know what you're going to get when you tune in, especially after a run of genuinely good episodes.
Lorraine Newman's handling of the Ben reveal and the return of Sharon gave some of us a soupcon of hope, but now it's painfully obvious that the inconsistency of quality, writing and performance is all too prevalent still.
What should be done?
Suffice it to say that what was bad about the show that wasn't shown last night was certainly shown tonight.
Tonight could have been entitled "A Tale of Three Bitches ... and Zainab."
Bitch 1 - Kat
Well, who else? I don't know any woman in fact or fiction who looks like Kat. She's not even a caricature of a prostitute, she is a prostitute of the worst order - an old whore. Easily, the best scene of the night was the brief incident where Shirley caught her sniffing the perfume Kat thought Shaggerman had bought her (later revealed to have been a gift from Alfie) and offered her a few unpleasant home truths.
Shirley was brilliant, and even moreso because, ironically, she didn't realise the type of nerve upon which she'd hit. She thought she was addressing Kat being soppily in love with Alfie, but in speaking of her disillusionment with Phil, she hit upon exactly what would happen to Kat with her Shaggerman: I Love You for these types are only words, and presents bribes to get a woman onside. Food for thought, but even moreso when you think that, the way Kat's going, Shirley is her destiny - a sad, lonely, old lag who seeks the bottle every time she allows herself to be drawn into some sort of relationship.
Shirley walks out on her kids. Kat dumps Tommy on unseen Jean whilst she narcissistically preens and suggestively flirts with a silly group of men who didn't give her the time of day for the better part of this year. She flaunts her tits and excessive make-up with a face like she's chewed a wasp. She's rude and disrespectful to her husband and hasn't a thought for anyone or anything but herself and her pleasure, to which she's entitled because her husband is running a business that keeps a roof over their head. She's entitled because she's a "dirty girl" who dresses like a slut because men smell slut on her. And it's all, all, all her husband's fault.
The only other minor scene of importance to come from this interlude was the brief scene between Mo and Shirley after Shirley's sacking, when Mo asked Shirley why she stuck around when she appears to have lost everything. Shirley cryptically replies that she "knows things." Of course she does, and that's why Phil wants her away from drink, away from the pub and under the same roof as he. Phil is an alkie, himself; and he knows Shirl has abinge drink dependency, especially when she is down or depressed and reaches for the bottle. It's then that she's the most dangerous. Phil's afraid that Shirley will get wasted and start telling all and sundry of his part in covering up Ben's murder of Heather.
People on various fora remark upon their hatred of Phil Mitchell. At the moment, Phil's at his lowest ebb, but the residents of Walford still drink at the pub he owns and get their cars serviced at his garage. And, he even owns a share of Max Branning's car dealership.
The rest of this football storyline was just shit, and the fight was embarrassing, with a lot of red herrings thrown in to confuse the numpties about the identity of Shaggerman. Max isn't in the pub, but ends up hurting his hand. (It's not Max). Michael exchanges lingering looks with Kat. (It's not Michael. Indeed, I'm at a loss to understand what the fuck all of this is about). Then there are the horny look exchanges between Kat and Jack the Male Slut. (It's not Jack).
It's DEREK. And anyone with a bit of nous would know this. Derek acted easy and natural, totally at ease in Kat's presence, giving nothing away. Derek is the seasoned scoundrel, con man and professional bad boy. A manipulator. For anyone thinking that Derek isn't the type to leave a romantic message written in lippy on a bandage, think again. Derek has been in prison fourteen years, his first romantic encounter upon release was with Rainie Cross, a woman who made Kat look like quality. He's not fussy, and he's probably, at heart, a romantic whose idea of beauty would end at someone as faux tart glamourous as Kat. He probably thinks he's hit pay dirt that she's receptive (and that she hasn't asked for payment in return).
Believe me ... Eastenders have a habit of revealing the culprit as the least likeliest of persons to have committed a deed. Think Darren Miller with Heather. Think Dirty Den and Michelle. Shaggerman is Derek.
And whoever thought up this stupid storyline should be taken out and slapped. (As well, whoever thinks this storyline or the football ones were "exciting," the words "pander" and "sad" were invented for you. And, yes, vald, I'm pointing at YOU).
The fight in the Vic and the banter before were just pathetic. Most of those characters, until recently, had never interacted with each other. They had no associative history and it showed. Was this storyline idea Kirkwood's or Newman's? It's obvious that it hasn't worked and is being ended sooner, rather than later; but I do wish that EastEnders would stop propagating this shit about Kat being the be-all and the end-all of competence at the Vic. She simply isn't.
She's just a slapper and a bitch.
Bitch 2 - Lucy
If Kat is a selfish, narcissistic bitch, Lucy qualifies as just a stupid bitch. I'll say it again: Lucy didn't even realise that Ben wasn't a Beale. So anyone that stupid isn't going to recognise the fact that her father had a breakdown, and it's clear she's been filling Bobby's head with shit that wide-mouthed horny toad has been scamming her about fathers.
Bobby wants a relationship with his father, but Lucy's ensured that he's inclined to view Ian as unreliable and undependable. What's wrong with letting Bobby help Ian on the stall? It's almost as if Lucy's ashamed of the stall, which really was the beginning of the so-called Beale Empire. The look she gave Ian when she walked by to nab Bobby was one of pure hatred as well as a bad smell. She knows that Bobby responding to Ian would give Ian leverage and help with his mental improvement, which might mean the old Ian would emerge and her little power game would be at an end.
Oh, wasn't it Bag o'Bones Beale who smugly stated that "this generation" of Beales wasn't greedy? Her bony ass - speaking of which, I was hoping Ian would use his six tens to crunch the bones sticking out of the rear of her too-tight jeans.
I am waiting for someone to smack the shit out of her. At least, tonight, she kept her mouth shut.
Speaking of smacking ...
Bitch 3 - Tanya
If anything, tonight's episode shows how Sharon doesn't work with the newer characters on the show, the majority of whom are Brannings. That whole forced scene of Ian introducing Sharon to Tanya (again) was so contrived. Yeah, we get it: get a character who is one of the two remaining original characters on the show to introduce the other original character, just returned, to a leading member of the producers' newest, biggest and currently the most important family. Not the most popular family, mind you, but a benediction from Sharon, who is linked by marriage and friendship with OLD Walford would legitimise the Brannings.
It's also clear that TPTB are lining up a Sharon-Tanya friendship. A Tanya-Sharon friendship simply would never happen. Sharon wouldn't concern herself with someone so shallow and blatantly upwardly mobile, a social climber who's nothing more than scrubbed up white trash; and Tanya would, at worst, be intimidated by Sharon, at best, jealous of her.
The dialogue and Sharon's behaviour were so incongruent with the character in general. Actually, the truest and most believeable behaviour in that sequence was Tanya, and that was sincere. Only Tanya is bitch enough to make snide remarks about someone else's child. Remember she was the one who did so to Alice when she arrived.
Tanya is leaving. Lucy and Kat need to go as well - if not by their own volition, then by producer's action, if need be.
And Zainab
So now we know why there was so much animosity between AJ and his wife and Zainab. I never once imagined that AJ had made a mixed marriage, but I should have realised as he is a non-practicing Muslim. AJ assimilated and married an infidel, and Zainab looked down her nose at the union.
What was it Zainab said Alia called her? Zainab the Pure.
And what is AJ but another selfish, self-victimising bad boy, shirking all responsibilities and kicking out of a marriage because his wife wanted a family, and he was happiest without children. He's a selfish putz, a manchild after his own pleasures. Watchable, nonetheless, but probably infuriating.
More than ever, this means he'll be paired with Denise. Moreover, he'll probably get her up the duff.
Bad end to the week. As next week centres around Shaggerman De Luxe, I don't hold out much hope.
It's one thing to be consistently good; quite another, to be consistently bad. At least with one or the other, you'd have the wherewithal to judge a programme on its merits or its shortcomings, and 'consistently bad' would mean a short shelf life for the programme in question.
It's just that when Eastenders is good, it's very, very good, and when it's bad, it's absolute rubbish. At its best, the programme consisted of very good episodes and the occasional mediocre one. Over the past decade, the show has deteriorated until we now have a gaggle of mediocre episodes, with one or two brief good scenes, the occasional outstanding episode, and then a string of episodes with can only be described as pukeworthingly dire. The problem is that many viewers who have only started watching within the past decade actually think "mediocre" is good, and they take offence when someone of longer viewing mentality criticises the quality.
Jesus, tonight fell into the "pukeworthingly dire" category. You never know what you're going to get when you tune in, especially after a run of genuinely good episodes.
Lorraine Newman's handling of the Ben reveal and the return of Sharon gave some of us a soupcon of hope, but now it's painfully obvious that the inconsistency of quality, writing and performance is all too prevalent still.
What should be done?
Suffice it to say that what was bad about the show that wasn't shown last night was certainly shown tonight.
Tonight could have been entitled "A Tale of Three Bitches ... and Zainab."
Bitch 1 - Kat
Well, who else? I don't know any woman in fact or fiction who looks like Kat. She's not even a caricature of a prostitute, she is a prostitute of the worst order - an old whore. Easily, the best scene of the night was the brief incident where Shirley caught her sniffing the perfume Kat thought Shaggerman had bought her (later revealed to have been a gift from Alfie) and offered her a few unpleasant home truths.
Shirley was brilliant, and even moreso because, ironically, she didn't realise the type of nerve upon which she'd hit. She thought she was addressing Kat being soppily in love with Alfie, but in speaking of her disillusionment with Phil, she hit upon exactly what would happen to Kat with her Shaggerman: I Love You for these types are only words, and presents bribes to get a woman onside. Food for thought, but even moreso when you think that, the way Kat's going, Shirley is her destiny - a sad, lonely, old lag who seeks the bottle every time she allows herself to be drawn into some sort of relationship.
Shirley walks out on her kids. Kat dumps Tommy on unseen Jean whilst she narcissistically preens and suggestively flirts with a silly group of men who didn't give her the time of day for the better part of this year. She flaunts her tits and excessive make-up with a face like she's chewed a wasp. She's rude and disrespectful to her husband and hasn't a thought for anyone or anything but herself and her pleasure, to which she's entitled because her husband is running a business that keeps a roof over their head. She's entitled because she's a "dirty girl" who dresses like a slut because men smell slut on her. And it's all, all, all her husband's fault.
The only other minor scene of importance to come from this interlude was the brief scene between Mo and Shirley after Shirley's sacking, when Mo asked Shirley why she stuck around when she appears to have lost everything. Shirley cryptically replies that she "knows things." Of course she does, and that's why Phil wants her away from drink, away from the pub and under the same roof as he. Phil is an alkie, himself; and he knows Shirl has abinge drink dependency, especially when she is down or depressed and reaches for the bottle. It's then that she's the most dangerous. Phil's afraid that Shirley will get wasted and start telling all and sundry of his part in covering up Ben's murder of Heather.
People on various fora remark upon their hatred of Phil Mitchell. At the moment, Phil's at his lowest ebb, but the residents of Walford still drink at the pub he owns and get their cars serviced at his garage. And, he even owns a share of Max Branning's car dealership.
The rest of this football storyline was just shit, and the fight was embarrassing, with a lot of red herrings thrown in to confuse the numpties about the identity of Shaggerman. Max isn't in the pub, but ends up hurting his hand. (It's not Max). Michael exchanges lingering looks with Kat. (It's not Michael. Indeed, I'm at a loss to understand what the fuck all of this is about). Then there are the horny look exchanges between Kat and Jack the Male Slut. (It's not Jack).
It's DEREK. And anyone with a bit of nous would know this. Derek acted easy and natural, totally at ease in Kat's presence, giving nothing away. Derek is the seasoned scoundrel, con man and professional bad boy. A manipulator. For anyone thinking that Derek isn't the type to leave a romantic message written in lippy on a bandage, think again. Derek has been in prison fourteen years, his first romantic encounter upon release was with Rainie Cross, a woman who made Kat look like quality. He's not fussy, and he's probably, at heart, a romantic whose idea of beauty would end at someone as faux tart glamourous as Kat. He probably thinks he's hit pay dirt that she's receptive (and that she hasn't asked for payment in return).
Believe me ... Eastenders have a habit of revealing the culprit as the least likeliest of persons to have committed a deed. Think Darren Miller with Heather. Think Dirty Den and Michelle. Shaggerman is Derek.
And whoever thought up this stupid storyline should be taken out and slapped. (As well, whoever thinks this storyline or the football ones were "exciting," the words "pander" and "sad" were invented for you. And, yes, vald, I'm pointing at YOU).
The fight in the Vic and the banter before were just pathetic. Most of those characters, until recently, had never interacted with each other. They had no associative history and it showed. Was this storyline idea Kirkwood's or Newman's? It's obvious that it hasn't worked and is being ended sooner, rather than later; but I do wish that EastEnders would stop propagating this shit about Kat being the be-all and the end-all of competence at the Vic. She simply isn't.
She's just a slapper and a bitch.
Bitch 2 - Lucy
If Kat is a selfish, narcissistic bitch, Lucy qualifies as just a stupid bitch. I'll say it again: Lucy didn't even realise that Ben wasn't a Beale. So anyone that stupid isn't going to recognise the fact that her father had a breakdown, and it's clear she's been filling Bobby's head with shit that wide-mouthed horny toad has been scamming her about fathers.
Bobby wants a relationship with his father, but Lucy's ensured that he's inclined to view Ian as unreliable and undependable. What's wrong with letting Bobby help Ian on the stall? It's almost as if Lucy's ashamed of the stall, which really was the beginning of the so-called Beale Empire. The look she gave Ian when she walked by to nab Bobby was one of pure hatred as well as a bad smell. She knows that Bobby responding to Ian would give Ian leverage and help with his mental improvement, which might mean the old Ian would emerge and her little power game would be at an end.
Oh, wasn't it Bag o'Bones Beale who smugly stated that "this generation" of Beales wasn't greedy? Her bony ass - speaking of which, I was hoping Ian would use his six tens to crunch the bones sticking out of the rear of her too-tight jeans.
I am waiting for someone to smack the shit out of her. At least, tonight, she kept her mouth shut.
Speaking of smacking ...
Bitch 3 - Tanya
If anything, tonight's episode shows how Sharon doesn't work with the newer characters on the show, the majority of whom are Brannings. That whole forced scene of Ian introducing Sharon to Tanya (again) was so contrived. Yeah, we get it: get a character who is one of the two remaining original characters on the show to introduce the other original character, just returned, to a leading member of the producers' newest, biggest and currently the most important family. Not the most popular family, mind you, but a benediction from Sharon, who is linked by marriage and friendship with OLD Walford would legitimise the Brannings.
It's also clear that TPTB are lining up a Sharon-Tanya friendship. A Tanya-Sharon friendship simply would never happen. Sharon wouldn't concern herself with someone so shallow and blatantly upwardly mobile, a social climber who's nothing more than scrubbed up white trash; and Tanya would, at worst, be intimidated by Sharon, at best, jealous of her.
The dialogue and Sharon's behaviour were so incongruent with the character in general. Actually, the truest and most believeable behaviour in that sequence was Tanya, and that was sincere. Only Tanya is bitch enough to make snide remarks about someone else's child. Remember she was the one who did so to Alice when she arrived.
Tanya is leaving. Lucy and Kat need to go as well - if not by their own volition, then by producer's action, if need be.
And Zainab
So now we know why there was so much animosity between AJ and his wife and Zainab. I never once imagined that AJ had made a mixed marriage, but I should have realised as he is a non-practicing Muslim. AJ assimilated and married an infidel, and Zainab looked down her nose at the union.
What was it Zainab said Alia called her? Zainab the Pure.
And what is AJ but another selfish, self-victimising bad boy, shirking all responsibilities and kicking out of a marriage because his wife wanted a family, and he was happiest without children. He's a selfish putz, a manchild after his own pleasures. Watchable, nonetheless, but probably infuriating.
More than ever, this means he'll be paired with Denise. Moreover, he'll probably get her up the duff.
Bad end to the week. As next week centres around Shaggerman De Luxe, I don't hold out much hope.
