This was a good episode, mostly; but first, I want to get a peeve off my chest. Here is one of the things I hate about EastEnders, especially under this particular regiime:
Several weeks ago, we had a protracted series of hand-wringing concerning Masood and his desire to be a teaching assistant. We heard all of his protracted backstory about how he really wanted to go to uni and become a teacher, but couldn't because - well, because he was married to Zainab. We saw him surreptitiously telling Syed about how he'd applied to become a teaching assistant and was wary of telling Zainab that they would have to tighten their belts because his salary would be lower.
We had Zainab's reaction - pejorative at first, but then accepting. We had all of that, including the OTT first day of school scene where Zainab was preparing Mas for his new career, sending him off with an apple.
And now we see Masood traipsing about the streets, yet again, as what? The postman he was before. It seems that his career as a teaching assistant lasted a grand total of one day. It's certainly not been mentioned since. It's as if the whole kerfuffle never happened, and, you know, I'm sure that's exactly what TPTB want their viewers to believe.
The plain truth is that they thought it would be cool and would work to have Masood go into the educational field, and then, after one episode showing that, decided it didn't work; so without further adieu, they returned him to his former life as a postman, thinking that most of the viewing public are so pig-shit thick and ignorant, they wouldn't mind that blip of a school episode. After all, these are the sort of viewers who say that a bit of retconning doesn't matter at all to the occasional (or to the regular, but stupid) viewer. These are the sort of viewers who thought nothing of wiping away an entire backstory and previous storyline of an iconic character just to make Sharon Cora's daughter. As one sage soul said (and, yes, vaslav37, I'm looking at you), if the writers want to do it, they'll do it.
Well, that's exactly what they've done. Given us some memorable scenes of a man wanting to better his position in life with a profession, and then slipped him inobtrusively back from whence he came, trodding the streets of East London as the local postman. The rest of those scenes were a dream, like Bobby Ewing in the shower.
And now for something completely different.
Tonight's episode was singular and good, for the most part - simply because it unified the only surviving elements of "Old Walford," and showed the pretenders how good they are together.
Sharon was Sharon again. Just look at the difference between her scenes with Tanya and those with Phil.
Rob Gittens wrote this episode tonight, and he's a writer who's been on the show a long time. If nothing else, this episode consigned the Brannings to the backseat where they firmly belong.
Phil Mitchell is back. Sharon inspired him, and Phil, inspired by Sharon, inspired Ian. And the Brannings were tossed to the curb, almost literally; and we were shown how really insignificant they truly are.
I realised when I saw the congruent scenes of Sharon with Tanya followed by Sharon with Phil that whoever is writing for her accommodates her to the Brannings and their cheap, overt and gurning style. Tanya and Sharon's friendship is so false and phony - as far as false and phony friendships are concerned, they rival Kat and Kim. Nosy Tanya wanting the sucky, syrupy details of Sharon's "date" with Jack - of course, assuming that it was all about sex, because Jack was divulging nothing; but then, sex is all Tanya thinks about when it comes to relationships, because sex is the basis of her relationship with Max.
Cheap, tawdry and hypocritical moment.
And Sharon showed exactly how important Jack was in her general scheme of things when she quickly begged off Tanya to run to Phil's phantom phonecall ... and that's when we saw real Sharon come alive.
The chemistry between Steve McFadden and Letitia Dean is electric. Their two characters share over twenty years of association as friends, lovers and - most of all - as equals; because, apart from Peggy, Sharon is the only woman whom Phil considers his equal and whom he respects. Their conversation was open, honest and forthright, and it was brilliantly written.
Phil's appeal to Sharon as a parent, asking what she would do if something happened to Dennis, which was down to her actions - a topic which led directly to a reference to Den and how when he thought he'd lost everything, he sought to hang onto the Vic, which is what Phil had to do, as something of a legacy for Ben.
The line of the night was clearly "get a grip." Sharon to Phil and Phil to Ian ... how long before we hear Phil returning the favour for Sharon?
Another thing, consider how these scenes would have played out between Phil and Shirley? There would have been lots of shouting, Shirley being overbearing and berating Phil, before both retreated to their respective corners to drink themselves stupid. Sharon made Phil see reason, and she didn't retreat when he sought to shut her out. She stood her ground.
Also, did anyone notice that Shirley's name has been removed from Phil's phonebook on his mobile? That's how much he cared about Shirley - out of sight, out of mind. Please, don't refer to Phil's reminiscing over the random photos found at the Arches (where AJ will clearly be recruited to work). That scene was all about Phil missing Ben. Shirley just happened to be part of the fixtures and fitting. Sorry, moaning lisa, but Shirley is totally insignificant. Sharon and Phil matter. That showed tonight, especially in the final scene where Phil took charge at the Vic.
Stood beside Jackshit as Phil took over the bar, Sharon's face showed exactly what she felt for Phil, and you could see her heart in her eyes. Jack should be so lucky to get a look like that from her. All he gets is shallow Sharon the flirt. Not the Sharon that mattered.
This Phil was the Phil pre-Grant leaving as well, the Phil taking interest in Ian's attempt to sell his stall in order to help Lucy out financially (see below). Phil realised that the Beale stall had been in the family for three generations. Selling that stall would be the end of a piece of Walford history. Good, too, that Phil clocked the part that Joey the Turd was playing in "influencing" the sale of the stall. Phil's warning to that steroid-chomping, tongue-lolling, mouth-breathing piece of wood that if he gave him any lip, he'd be spitting out teeth. Joey's reaction was typical of a coward and typical of him - duuuuuhh, his mouth opened wider.
Update: Just a final thought about Tanya's sneering "concern" at what she thought was Phil contemplating the depths of alcoholism on the basis that he had two bottles of whiskey with him on a park bench ... Tanya needs to look closer to home and look in the mirror before she passes out judgement like that ... because Tanya's actually passed out from her drink addiction as well. She certainly has an alcohol dependency, as has her mother and as has her skank-in-training daughter. That reaction, to me, was the height of hypocricisy and the ethos of Tanya, who thinks her shit doesn't smell.
Several weeks ago, we had a protracted series of hand-wringing concerning Masood and his desire to be a teaching assistant. We heard all of his protracted backstory about how he really wanted to go to uni and become a teacher, but couldn't because - well, because he was married to Zainab. We saw him surreptitiously telling Syed about how he'd applied to become a teaching assistant and was wary of telling Zainab that they would have to tighten their belts because his salary would be lower.
We had Zainab's reaction - pejorative at first, but then accepting. We had all of that, including the OTT first day of school scene where Zainab was preparing Mas for his new career, sending him off with an apple.
And now we see Masood traipsing about the streets, yet again, as what? The postman he was before. It seems that his career as a teaching assistant lasted a grand total of one day. It's certainly not been mentioned since. It's as if the whole kerfuffle never happened, and, you know, I'm sure that's exactly what TPTB want their viewers to believe.
The plain truth is that they thought it would be cool and would work to have Masood go into the educational field, and then, after one episode showing that, decided it didn't work; so without further adieu, they returned him to his former life as a postman, thinking that most of the viewing public are so pig-shit thick and ignorant, they wouldn't mind that blip of a school episode. After all, these are the sort of viewers who say that a bit of retconning doesn't matter at all to the occasional (or to the regular, but stupid) viewer. These are the sort of viewers who thought nothing of wiping away an entire backstory and previous storyline of an iconic character just to make Sharon Cora's daughter. As one sage soul said (and, yes, vaslav37, I'm looking at you), if the writers want to do it, they'll do it.
Well, that's exactly what they've done. Given us some memorable scenes of a man wanting to better his position in life with a profession, and then slipped him inobtrusively back from whence he came, trodding the streets of East London as the local postman. The rest of those scenes were a dream, like Bobby Ewing in the shower.
And now for something completely different.
Tonight's episode was singular and good, for the most part - simply because it unified the only surviving elements of "Old Walford," and showed the pretenders how good they are together.
Sharon was Sharon again. Just look at the difference between her scenes with Tanya and those with Phil.
Rob Gittens wrote this episode tonight, and he's a writer who's been on the show a long time. If nothing else, this episode consigned the Brannings to the backseat where they firmly belong.
Phil Mitchell is back. Sharon inspired him, and Phil, inspired by Sharon, inspired Ian. And the Brannings were tossed to the curb, almost literally; and we were shown how really insignificant they truly are.
I realised when I saw the congruent scenes of Sharon with Tanya followed by Sharon with Phil that whoever is writing for her accommodates her to the Brannings and their cheap, overt and gurning style. Tanya and Sharon's friendship is so false and phony - as far as false and phony friendships are concerned, they rival Kat and Kim. Nosy Tanya wanting the sucky, syrupy details of Sharon's "date" with Jack - of course, assuming that it was all about sex, because Jack was divulging nothing; but then, sex is all Tanya thinks about when it comes to relationships, because sex is the basis of her relationship with Max.
Cheap, tawdry and hypocritical moment.
And Sharon showed exactly how important Jack was in her general scheme of things when she quickly begged off Tanya to run to Phil's phantom phonecall ... and that's when we saw real Sharon come alive.
The chemistry between Steve McFadden and Letitia Dean is electric. Their two characters share over twenty years of association as friends, lovers and - most of all - as equals; because, apart from Peggy, Sharon is the only woman whom Phil considers his equal and whom he respects. Their conversation was open, honest and forthright, and it was brilliantly written.
Phil's appeal to Sharon as a parent, asking what she would do if something happened to Dennis, which was down to her actions - a topic which led directly to a reference to Den and how when he thought he'd lost everything, he sought to hang onto the Vic, which is what Phil had to do, as something of a legacy for Ben.
The line of the night was clearly "get a grip." Sharon to Phil and Phil to Ian ... how long before we hear Phil returning the favour for Sharon?
Another thing, consider how these scenes would have played out between Phil and Shirley? There would have been lots of shouting, Shirley being overbearing and berating Phil, before both retreated to their respective corners to drink themselves stupid. Sharon made Phil see reason, and she didn't retreat when he sought to shut her out. She stood her ground.
Also, did anyone notice that Shirley's name has been removed from Phil's phonebook on his mobile? That's how much he cared about Shirley - out of sight, out of mind. Please, don't refer to Phil's reminiscing over the random photos found at the Arches (where AJ will clearly be recruited to work). That scene was all about Phil missing Ben. Shirley just happened to be part of the fixtures and fitting. Sorry, moaning lisa, but Shirley is totally insignificant. Sharon and Phil matter. That showed tonight, especially in the final scene where Phil took charge at the Vic.
Stood beside Jackshit as Phil took over the bar, Sharon's face showed exactly what she felt for Phil, and you could see her heart in her eyes. Jack should be so lucky to get a look like that from her. All he gets is shallow Sharon the flirt. Not the Sharon that mattered.
This Phil was the Phil pre-Grant leaving as well, the Phil taking interest in Ian's attempt to sell his stall in order to help Lucy out financially (see below). Phil realised that the Beale stall had been in the family for three generations. Selling that stall would be the end of a piece of Walford history. Good, too, that Phil clocked the part that Joey the Turd was playing in "influencing" the sale of the stall. Phil's warning to that steroid-chomping, tongue-lolling, mouth-breathing piece of wood that if he gave him any lip, he'd be spitting out teeth. Joey's reaction was typical of a coward and typical of him - duuuuuhh, his mouth opened wider.
Joey before the Green Room
The Phil who bolstered Ian's flagging spirits and reminded him of Pete and Albert Beale's legacy was the Phil with whom Sharon fell in love.
Throughout all of this, the Brannings kept, literally stepping in dog shit. Jack should just stand by helplessly, whilst Tanya got the situation totally wrong when she saw Phil sat on the bench with two bottles of whiskey close at hand. She beat a hasty retreat once Sharon took the situation back and knew exactly what Phil was all about.
Team Mitchell is back. Bugger off, Brannings.
They really stank rankly tonight, as well as viewers having to be forced to endure - yet again - Tony Discipline's smell-the-fart acting technique. Also, viewers were given the added treat of a scene shared by two people who are arguably the worst actors ever to appear in EastEnders:- Discipline and David Witts. They make the characters of Danny Mitchell and Callum Monks look positively appetising.
You know, in the iconic American sitcom from the 1950s, I Love Lucy, there was an episode where Lucy wrote a novel which was so bad you could smell it for miles, but a publisher bought it, and Lucy thought she had the last laugh - until the publisher told her they were buying the book to use the first chapter in a text book about how not to be a bad writer. Well, that scene in the cafe tonight between Tyler and Joey could be used as a masterclass in bad acting.
Notice, also, how both lads are being made to wear short-sleeved shirts which are a size too small to emphasize their bulging bits? This is what comes when you hire for looks and no talent or experience. Both need to work on their diction, however, especially Witts, who is bloody unintelligible and growls his lines. Discipline mumbles his. Good lord, this is why we pay a licence fee?
Of course, Tyler (who isn't brain of Britain) is going to be used as a pawn by Derek to prey on Joey's jealousy. I just want to know how the hell Derek can offer Joey a stall on the market, when Derek isn't the market inspector. And Joey showed just how much of a clueless, spoiled and entitled brat he is by using the Emporium as a party place and trashing it. I can't wait for Tyler to smack his smug face next episode. I want Phil to smack him too - because I reckon Joey, like his old man, is a coward and a pussy who punches down.
Oh, the Masoods ... if this is the best lead-in to a storyline for Chryed, it was embarrassing. Zainab was in Goodness Gracious Me, Masood's obviously forgotten he's supposed to be a teaching assistant now (or the writers have), and Tamwar sits there so fucking miserable at that table, I just wanted Zainab to rub vindaloo deep into his face. I don't think Tamwar is long for the show after Chryed leaves, and I think you'll find Zainab doing what she's always wanted to do - run the restaurant.
I could care less now about Chryed. Syed is a bore and a sneak, and Christian looks like Tintin.
Lola and Lucy. Lucy and Lola. First Lola. I don't like her, and I hate how TPTB are pushing this "good mother" shit, when all she's interested in is getting Jay onside as her babydaddy. She's even going to corrupt Abi as we see her and Abi stealing cleaning accessories in the next few weeks. She reckons she's got good business ideas, but all she wants to do is earn cash in hand so she can spend it. Ne'mind paying income tax or National Insurance. Other mugs can do that for her, as Lola wants to live high off the hog, and Billy is still left caring for the baby.
I'm Team Social Worker in this one. I've never liked this silly little chav, who has no money for baby bum cream, but all sorts for a fancy phone and expensive make-up. Her eye make-up, alone, must cost a week's worth of bum cream. Yet she steals off Janine and Billy condones it. Billy and Lola really need a wake-up call, and I hope it comes soon (and that she leaves). The baby will be sought by Grandad Phil, once it's made obvious that she's Ben's sprog. Watch this space.
Lucy's mouth-breathing was all over the place tonight. Another gurner with poor diction who garbles her lines.
Lucy Imitating a Venus Fly-Trap
I want to see an episode where she swallows a fly. And, please, EastEnders ... no more full body shots of Hetty Bywater in tight jeans. I am sorry, but she looks like an inmate recently released from Treblinka. She is simply too thin. She really looks emaciated in those jeans.
As for Lucy owing Michael (i.e Janine) £1500 (with interest), that is not a vast sum of money, considering that the cafe is a 24/7 operation and appears to be thriving, She also has the chippie, another business, who opens from about noontime until late at night, and then there's the stall.
I'm no businessperson, but I understand about staff wages etc, but - fuck me - she ought to be able to scrape together fifteen hundred quid from all three businesses in a day to pay off Michael Moon. She found it for a solicitor to handle the sale of that property, didn't she? Michael is right - deals do fall through. It;'s the way of the business world. She needs to grow up and, yes, get a grip.
Janine has Michael in a vice, and she's one step ahead of him. Good thinking that he used money from her account to buy that flash car, he was trying to sell to get money for himself and Scarlett. I want to know what he earns from the boxing club, which always seems packed out to the gills ... not.
Decent episode. Phil's back, and the Brannings are toast.
This song is from Sharon to Jack about Phil:-
Suck it up, Jack.
Update: Just a final thought about Tanya's sneering "concern" at what she thought was Phil contemplating the depths of alcoholism on the basis that he had two bottles of whiskey with him on a park bench ... Tanya needs to look closer to home and look in the mirror before she passes out judgement like that ... because Tanya's actually passed out from her drink addiction as well. She certainly has an alcohol dependency, as has her mother and as has her skank-in-training daughter. That reaction, to me, was the height of hypocricisy and the ethos of Tanya, who thinks her shit doesn't smell.
I'll be honest, I sometimes disagreed with the way you spoke to some posters on DS, but I have to say your posts on this blog are a great read and I find myself agreeing with most of what you say. You are very articulate with your opinions and you have a clear passion for the show. Keep it up please!
ReplyDelete