Retcon's just another word for nothing left to lose; no one's going to bother anyway. Backstories were once a thing Eastenders always used. History was good enough for Den ... and good enough for Phil and Grant back then ...
Welcome to the retconned world of the Brannings, a horror story in and of itself. Here's a good family theme song for the Brannings, the cancer that is spreading around Walford and seems to have affected Sharon. (She'll need those drugs).
OK, so less than a year ago, we learned the circumstances of Tanya's and Derek's first meeting - at Tanya's and Max's wedding, five months after gurney Lauren's birthday. Eleven months after the fact, we know know that Derek met Tanya when Max brought her around for Sunday lunch, when she didn't eat the fat off her lamb (she sure has been chomping fat now), and Derek's mum, the late Reenie, pronounced her "up herself" and high maintenance.
Reenie was obviously a good judge of character. Since we know, from Carol's statement last year that Max didn't bring Tanya around Jim's until she was up the duff and he'd left Rachel, I guess Tanya had bread in the oven as she sat at the Branning table on that occasion.
A word to the Tweenies and vaslav37 and anyone else living in fear of the ultimate retcon: Shut the fuck up. Lauren is not Derek's daughter. Max didn't introduce Tanya to BranningVille until she was pregnant and he had left Rachel and Bradley. Although, when that introductory occasion occurred, shouldn't Derek have been either with his own wife and Joey, awaiting the birth of Alice? And shortly after that, shouldn't Derek have been arrested and thrown in the slammer? Because, if I recall, he had no idea that he even had a daughter, and Alice and Lauren are the same age.
Oh, what a tangled web we weave when we choose to retcon backstories for sensationalism's sake, and that's the standard of the Branning family.
Boy, were they overbearing tonight, the way they all honed in on Sharon.
Sharon, Sharon, Sharon, Sharon, Sharon ...
That reminds me of another TV family with a plethora of spoiled, blonde girls ...
The Brannings - well, Tanya and Jack - were positively shitting themselves over the "damage" that had been done Sharon, their latest conquest and the latest vehicle in their validation. Jack, chasing Sharon across the Square, then attacking the buzzer on the club, demanding to see her; then Tanya, smarming her way back into Sharon's good graces, proclaming an undying friendship after only two months. I almost puked - Tanya swearing that she'd never told tales, whining about how she and Jane set the world to right (remember their victimisation of Dawn?), and only digging a deeper hole.
For anyone wondering how Derek, Jack et al knew about the demise of Dennis Rickman, think about it. Put your critical thinking caps on your one brain cell.
Who is the Brannings' step-mother?
(Hint: "I ain't one ter gossip but ...) Exactly. Dot would have been sure to have clued every man Jackshit one of them in on the gory tales of the the Queen Vic - Den's death, Dennis;s murder outside, Tiffany being struck down by Frank. You don't need The Walford Gazette with Dot around.
Something strange struck me tonight. There's been something not quite right about Sharon since she returned, and tonight, Tanya busted it with her reference to Jane.
First, Sharon should have known who Jane was. She had never met her, but Ian did visit her in 2008 and would have been sure to have mentioned Jane and included pictures of the kids - the twins and Bobby. And secondly, and more important, Sharon's not made any mentnion at all of either Michelle or Vicky.
Michelle was and is her best and oldest friend. They lived in the same state, and whilst they may have lived a day's travel apart, they still would have kept in touch. Certainly, Michelle would have been on hand for the birth of Dennis and would have done everything in her power to support Sharon emotionally and morally. And Vicky is Sharon's sister. Yet, she's made no mention of them, and when she was explaining her addiction to Jack tonight, she made it sound as though she only went to America after Dennis was born as if America, "a new country", was just that - someplace new - when it wasn't. Sharon had been living in Florida off and on since 1996. She had a home and a business there, which she lost because of Angie's healthcare costs. Presumably, she had a Green Card, but that would have been rendered invalid the first time she spent more than six months outside the country; and it's not easy to re-obtain one. And we know she went to the US almost immediately after Dennis's death, because Phil accompanied her and didn't return for a couple of months, seeing that she settled in.
Jesus, this retcon shit is so annoying. It's just indicative of the appeal to the shallow end of the viewing public and is an insult to a soap which was formerly steeped in realism.
As far as the Brannings are concerned, they really should have stopped with Max. He's the most nuanced and most interesting one of the lot. Lipsuck and Abi were, as usual, glued to the couch whilst Tanya bounced the blubber about the room. And Derek's apology was anything but sincere.
(Psssst ... in case you haven't figured it out, Max didn't "defend" Tanya because he was afraid that Derek would reveal his deep, dark secret, which will only get revealed at the duff-duffs on Christmas Eve, so an early reveal would have saved us all the trouble of suffering the insufferable Brannings for the next two-and-a-half months.)
And perhaps Tanya should apologise to Toadface for stirring shit she shouldn't have with his daughter. Both were out of order.
And kudos to Phil for putting some home truths to Sharon-the-Branning-Satellite. She decided she didn't want Phil to be associated with Dennis; well, does she know she entrusted him to the care of an attempted murderer, who took him back to a house where another attempted murderer lived?
She really is most unlikeable with that lot, but she was more like her old self, only to watch that crumble when she succumbed to going home with Jack for a tete-a-tete. And how fucking hypocritical is Jack! Jack knows jackshit about loss. He's lost James and Ronnie's divorced him; but he rarely sees Amy, who lives a stone's throw away, and never sees Penny and Richard. And does Sharon know that Richard's mother is Sam Mitchell?
Jack's "not 'appy" about the way things have turned out with his kids. Well, do something the fuck about it. Visit Penny. Visit Richard. Establish a bond. Stop bad-mouthing Amy's mother and offer her more support. Give me a fucking break ... and on top of all that, knowing Sharon's an addict, he plies her with wine and tries to get a legover - after Tanya had suggested her staple: plop the kids in front of the telly with a DVD and then get rat-arsed.
Damn, who the fuck are these poor white trash? Here's a song to cheer Jack up. He can masturbate to the tune:- (There's even a cartoon for vaslav37, Callum and the kids).
More pity party for Lola. She and Billy obviously didn't like Phil's terms, so they play tough. My guess is that the po-faced Social Worker will make things difficult and Phil, after consulting slick Jimmy, the electronic ciggie-smoking spiv lawyer, who seems to be a specialist in child custody, will work wonders and get Phil custody. (Cue Sharon and Phil's reunion and Happy Jack miserable).
I am still feeling no sympathy for Lola. Giving childbirth in public like some mediaeval royalty doesn't discount the fact that she's a common chav who treated everyone on the Square rudely and with disdain and played the victim when her inappropriate behaviour was called out.
Eastenders is going all out on a Lola redemption campaign. Please, spare us.
And finally, the Masoods, and lyin' cheatin' and stealin' moral vacuum Syed, who will leave from whence he came. The biggest surprise about all of this is their sudden transformation from people who thought their son, his lifestyle and his boyfriend were abominations to be shunned. Why, last year, she was even encouraging Amira in reuniting with Syed. Oh, and Syed has gay friends? It's a bloody wonder Syed even has friends. Whoda thunk that?
Awful episode.
Welcome to the retconned world of the Brannings, a horror story in and of itself. Here's a good family theme song for the Brannings, the cancer that is spreading around Walford and seems to have affected Sharon. (She'll need those drugs).
OK, so less than a year ago, we learned the circumstances of Tanya's and Derek's first meeting - at Tanya's and Max's wedding, five months after gurney Lauren's birthday. Eleven months after the fact, we know know that Derek met Tanya when Max brought her around for Sunday lunch, when she didn't eat the fat off her lamb (she sure has been chomping fat now), and Derek's mum, the late Reenie, pronounced her "up herself" and high maintenance.
Reenie was obviously a good judge of character. Since we know, from Carol's statement last year that Max didn't bring Tanya around Jim's until she was up the duff and he'd left Rachel, I guess Tanya had bread in the oven as she sat at the Branning table on that occasion.
A word to the Tweenies and vaslav37 and anyone else living in fear of the ultimate retcon: Shut the fuck up. Lauren is not Derek's daughter. Max didn't introduce Tanya to BranningVille until she was pregnant and he had left Rachel and Bradley. Although, when that introductory occasion occurred, shouldn't Derek have been either with his own wife and Joey, awaiting the birth of Alice? And shortly after that, shouldn't Derek have been arrested and thrown in the slammer? Because, if I recall, he had no idea that he even had a daughter, and Alice and Lauren are the same age.
Oh, what a tangled web we weave when we choose to retcon backstories for sensationalism's sake, and that's the standard of the Branning family.
Boy, were they overbearing tonight, the way they all honed in on Sharon.
Sharon, Sharon, Sharon, Sharon, Sharon ...
That reminds me of another TV family with a plethora of spoiled, blonde girls ...
For anyone wondering how Derek, Jack et al knew about the demise of Dennis Rickman, think about it. Put your critical thinking caps on your one brain cell.
Who is the Brannings' step-mother?
(Hint: "I ain't one ter gossip but ...) Exactly. Dot would have been sure to have clued every man Jackshit one of them in on the gory tales of the the Queen Vic - Den's death, Dennis;s murder outside, Tiffany being struck down by Frank. You don't need The Walford Gazette with Dot around.
Something strange struck me tonight. There's been something not quite right about Sharon since she returned, and tonight, Tanya busted it with her reference to Jane.
First, Sharon should have known who Jane was. She had never met her, but Ian did visit her in 2008 and would have been sure to have mentioned Jane and included pictures of the kids - the twins and Bobby. And secondly, and more important, Sharon's not made any mentnion at all of either Michelle or Vicky.
Michelle was and is her best and oldest friend. They lived in the same state, and whilst they may have lived a day's travel apart, they still would have kept in touch. Certainly, Michelle would have been on hand for the birth of Dennis and would have done everything in her power to support Sharon emotionally and morally. And Vicky is Sharon's sister. Yet, she's made no mention of them, and when she was explaining her addiction to Jack tonight, she made it sound as though she only went to America after Dennis was born as if America, "a new country", was just that - someplace new - when it wasn't. Sharon had been living in Florida off and on since 1996. She had a home and a business there, which she lost because of Angie's healthcare costs. Presumably, she had a Green Card, but that would have been rendered invalid the first time she spent more than six months outside the country; and it's not easy to re-obtain one. And we know she went to the US almost immediately after Dennis's death, because Phil accompanied her and didn't return for a couple of months, seeing that she settled in.
Jesus, this retcon shit is so annoying. It's just indicative of the appeal to the shallow end of the viewing public and is an insult to a soap which was formerly steeped in realism.
As far as the Brannings are concerned, they really should have stopped with Max. He's the most nuanced and most interesting one of the lot. Lipsuck and Abi were, as usual, glued to the couch whilst Tanya bounced the blubber about the room. And Derek's apology was anything but sincere.
(Psssst ... in case you haven't figured it out, Max didn't "defend" Tanya because he was afraid that Derek would reveal his deep, dark secret, which will only get revealed at the duff-duffs on Christmas Eve, so an early reveal would have saved us all the trouble of suffering the insufferable Brannings for the next two-and-a-half months.)
And perhaps Tanya should apologise to Toadface for stirring shit she shouldn't have with his daughter. Both were out of order.
And kudos to Phil for putting some home truths to Sharon-the-Branning-Satellite. She decided she didn't want Phil to be associated with Dennis; well, does she know she entrusted him to the care of an attempted murderer, who took him back to a house where another attempted murderer lived?
She really is most unlikeable with that lot, but she was more like her old self, only to watch that crumble when she succumbed to going home with Jack for a tete-a-tete. And how fucking hypocritical is Jack! Jack knows jackshit about loss. He's lost James and Ronnie's divorced him; but he rarely sees Amy, who lives a stone's throw away, and never sees Penny and Richard. And does Sharon know that Richard's mother is Sam Mitchell?
Jack's "not 'appy" about the way things have turned out with his kids. Well, do something the fuck about it. Visit Penny. Visit Richard. Establish a bond. Stop bad-mouthing Amy's mother and offer her more support. Give me a fucking break ... and on top of all that, knowing Sharon's an addict, he plies her with wine and tries to get a legover - after Tanya had suggested her staple: plop the kids in front of the telly with a DVD and then get rat-arsed.
Damn, who the fuck are these poor white trash? Here's a song to cheer Jack up. He can masturbate to the tune:- (There's even a cartoon for vaslav37, Callum and the kids).
More pity party for Lola. She and Billy obviously didn't like Phil's terms, so they play tough. My guess is that the po-faced Social Worker will make things difficult and Phil, after consulting slick Jimmy, the electronic ciggie-smoking spiv lawyer, who seems to be a specialist in child custody, will work wonders and get Phil custody. (Cue Sharon and Phil's reunion and Happy Jack miserable).
I am still feeling no sympathy for Lola. Giving childbirth in public like some mediaeval royalty doesn't discount the fact that she's a common chav who treated everyone on the Square rudely and with disdain and played the victim when her inappropriate behaviour was called out.
Eastenders is going all out on a Lola redemption campaign. Please, spare us.
And finally, the Masoods, and lyin' cheatin' and stealin' moral vacuum Syed, who will leave from whence he came. The biggest surprise about all of this is their sudden transformation from people who thought their son, his lifestyle and his boyfriend were abominations to be shunned. Why, last year, she was even encouraging Amira in reuniting with Syed. Oh, and Syed has gay friends? It's a bloody wonder Syed even has friends. Whoda thunk that?
Awful episode.
No comments:
Post a Comment