Vald, the man-hating Alfie-and-Phil-hating old troll on Digital Spy is whining again.
She's one of the biggest Katapologists going and one who thinks that it's clearly ok for a woman to slut it about, but heaps huge criticism on any man who does so.
She's worried that Kat, the patron saint of heartless whores, is about to be sacrificed at the altar of the great god Yorke in order to proved a place (presumably in the Vic) for Sharon, real Walford royalty. It's not only Kat, she's worried about, it's Shirley - which is a new concern for Vald. My opinion is that the Wicked Witch of the East is joining forces with her soul-sister, the Wicked Witch of the West (the one who obsesses over Shirley) in a veritable coven of Sharon-hate.
My, my, I sense a load of Flying Monkey trolls coming my way, all steeped to the gills in contrived lies and feigned affronts. Dictionaries to the ready.
Firstly, Shirley was sacrificed as soon as someone came up with the bright idea of pairing her with Phil. Seriously, that union never was going to last. As soon as it came about, Shirley's death warrant as a character was signed, sealed and delivered. The Shirley-Phil union was a cauldron waiting to explode. In fact, as soon as they moved in together, as soon as she confronted him over his drug-addicted behaviour as to whether he would have acted that way around Sharon, as soon as she got the standard non-response of silence from Phil, her fate was met.
That conversation took place way back in 2010, after the Vic had burned, after Peggy had left and after Phil miraculously recovered from his crack cocaine addiction within a week; and then, even then, with the first mention of Sharon's name, I knew that sometime in the near future, she'd appear again, and the inevitable would happen.
And Shirley would be toast.
As for Kat, 2010 was a fateful year for her as well. As soon as she lumbered onto the horizon, pregnant from a one night stand with her husband's cousin, the die was cast. As soon as viewers who'd grown to love and root for Kat during her first stint from 2000 to 2005 saw her physically abuse her husband, slap her way around Walford and encourage Stacey to break up another woman's marriage simply because she could, she went from hero to zero.
Whether it's excessive botox or bad writing, Kat is now an unredeemable figure. And I wish Katapologists like that smugwump Vald would stop trying to justify her infidelity to Alfie. Yes, yes, yes, we know Roxy loves him and confessed as much. Yes, yes, yes, we know Alfie allowed her and Amy to live at the Vic, but the point is this - and this is what Vald's man-hating small mind seems incapable of handling: Alfie never slept with Roxy. In fact, he gently let her down and told her that he was a married man.
In short, Alfie - as annoying and as cloying as he can be at the worst of times - has the moral high ground and Kat the slut doesn't. He could so easily have slept with Roxy, considering the fact that Kat didn't flinch in sleeping with that rat-faced, little deliveryman. Tit for tat. Shit for Kat.
But he didn't. Had he done so, he would have been as bad as Kat. Had he allowed Roxy to share his bed during the several weeks she lived at the Vic, he would have been worse.
He wasn't. Alfie wins this round. Stop sniveling and get over it.
As for Sharon, who knows if she will "get the Vic?" Phil owns the Vic, and Sharon's penniless. In fact, it's been mooted that Phil and Janine appoint her manager of R and R, which, at one time, belonged to Sharon as Angie's Den. At the moment, the Moons are landlords and managers of the pub. If Kat's displaced from that situation, it won't be to make room for Sharon; it will be to Roxy's advantage.
Kat wasn't written badly to make way for Sharon; she was written badly because the Executive Producer of that moment was arrogant and didn't know his subject matter.
I'm beginning to think that it might be Sharon who's the sacrificial lamb here, and that her return is going to be used as a cheap excuse to validate the Brannings in the same way Pat's exit was appropriated for them. Almost as soon as she arrives in Walford, Phil - with bigger problems of his own - palms her off on Max Branning, who sleazes into a friendship of sorts, and which leads to encounters and future immediate dealings with the shallow Tanya and the priapic Jack.
Sharon, unless she's going through a mid-life crisis at the moment, was always a pretty sharp cookie. She'd recognise a sleazebag like Max Branning, who's only a few life forms higher than Nick Cotton. She'd read Tanya like the bitchy kindergarten book she is, and as soon as she learned Jack Branning has a child with Sam Mitchell (amongst others) as well as his history as a bent copper, she'd run a mile.
Once again, an established and iconic Eastenders character is used to give credence to a dysfunctional hodgepodge family of scrubbed-up white trash as one of the premier families of Walford.
They're not.
This is where the real sacrifice lies, and it sucks.
She's one of the biggest Katapologists going and one who thinks that it's clearly ok for a woman to slut it about, but heaps huge criticism on any man who does so.
She's worried that Kat, the patron saint of heartless whores, is about to be sacrificed at the altar of the great god Yorke in order to proved a place (presumably in the Vic) for Sharon, real Walford royalty. It's not only Kat, she's worried about, it's Shirley - which is a new concern for Vald. My opinion is that the Wicked Witch of the East is joining forces with her soul-sister, the Wicked Witch of the West (the one who obsesses over Shirley) in a veritable coven of Sharon-hate.
My, my, I sense a load of Flying Monkey trolls coming my way, all steeped to the gills in contrived lies and feigned affronts. Dictionaries to the ready.
Firstly, Shirley was sacrificed as soon as someone came up with the bright idea of pairing her with Phil. Seriously, that union never was going to last. As soon as it came about, Shirley's death warrant as a character was signed, sealed and delivered. The Shirley-Phil union was a cauldron waiting to explode. In fact, as soon as they moved in together, as soon as she confronted him over his drug-addicted behaviour as to whether he would have acted that way around Sharon, as soon as she got the standard non-response of silence from Phil, her fate was met.
That conversation took place way back in 2010, after the Vic had burned, after Peggy had left and after Phil miraculously recovered from his crack cocaine addiction within a week; and then, even then, with the first mention of Sharon's name, I knew that sometime in the near future, she'd appear again, and the inevitable would happen.
And Shirley would be toast.
As for Kat, 2010 was a fateful year for her as well. As soon as she lumbered onto the horizon, pregnant from a one night stand with her husband's cousin, the die was cast. As soon as viewers who'd grown to love and root for Kat during her first stint from 2000 to 2005 saw her physically abuse her husband, slap her way around Walford and encourage Stacey to break up another woman's marriage simply because she could, she went from hero to zero.
Whether it's excessive botox or bad writing, Kat is now an unredeemable figure. And I wish Katapologists like that smugwump Vald would stop trying to justify her infidelity to Alfie. Yes, yes, yes, we know Roxy loves him and confessed as much. Yes, yes, yes, we know Alfie allowed her and Amy to live at the Vic, but the point is this - and this is what Vald's man-hating small mind seems incapable of handling: Alfie never slept with Roxy. In fact, he gently let her down and told her that he was a married man.
In short, Alfie - as annoying and as cloying as he can be at the worst of times - has the moral high ground and Kat the slut doesn't. He could so easily have slept with Roxy, considering the fact that Kat didn't flinch in sleeping with that rat-faced, little deliveryman. Tit for tat. Shit for Kat.
But he didn't. Had he done so, he would have been as bad as Kat. Had he allowed Roxy to share his bed during the several weeks she lived at the Vic, he would have been worse.
He wasn't. Alfie wins this round. Stop sniveling and get over it.
As for Sharon, who knows if she will "get the Vic?" Phil owns the Vic, and Sharon's penniless. In fact, it's been mooted that Phil and Janine appoint her manager of R and R, which, at one time, belonged to Sharon as Angie's Den. At the moment, the Moons are landlords and managers of the pub. If Kat's displaced from that situation, it won't be to make room for Sharon; it will be to Roxy's advantage.
Kat wasn't written badly to make way for Sharon; she was written badly because the Executive Producer of that moment was arrogant and didn't know his subject matter.
I'm beginning to think that it might be Sharon who's the sacrificial lamb here, and that her return is going to be used as a cheap excuse to validate the Brannings in the same way Pat's exit was appropriated for them. Almost as soon as she arrives in Walford, Phil - with bigger problems of his own - palms her off on Max Branning, who sleazes into a friendship of sorts, and which leads to encounters and future immediate dealings with the shallow Tanya and the priapic Jack.
Sharon, unless she's going through a mid-life crisis at the moment, was always a pretty sharp cookie. She'd recognise a sleazebag like Max Branning, who's only a few life forms higher than Nick Cotton. She'd read Tanya like the bitchy kindergarten book she is, and as soon as she learned Jack Branning has a child with Sam Mitchell (amongst others) as well as his history as a bent copper, she'd run a mile.
Once again, an established and iconic Eastenders character is used to give credence to a dysfunctional hodgepodge family of scrubbed-up white trash as one of the premier families of Walford.
They're not.
This is where the real sacrifice lies, and it sucks.
No comments:
Post a Comment