Newman's Latest Interview Proves She's Aiming for the Lowest Common Denominator

When the most intelligent comment on a BBC webpage, regarding Lorraine Newman's latest interview, comes from the infamous monalisa, not only is the show in trouble, but it's patently obvious that Lorraine Newman is aiming this show smack, dab, directly at the lower echelon of the teen element.

Practically every one of the twenty comments made were riddled with basic spelling mistakes, when they weren't written in text-ese and centred around the "hotness" of Joey or Lauren. The rest were whines about Lola getting her baby back or getting Alfie and Kat back together.

We now know whom EastEnders are trying to please.

vaslav37, I take my hat off to you. You were right. This lot of ya-hoo scriptwriters will retcon to their heart's content, because nobody who watches now, gives a rat's ass. And for some reason - maybe it's the unstable economy - actors who, previously, would make some sort of protest at the writing done for them, are keeping their mouths shut.

Example: Letitia Dean would, surely, have remembered that New Year's Day was the anniversary of Dennis Rickman's death as surely as Steve McFadden would know that Peggy and Sharon had reconciled before Sharon left the last time; yet both are content to play the badly-written script as it's given to them. The mind boggles.

There you go, vaslav37, Cora the Bora may turn out to be Sharon's mother, after all. Anything is possible in this substandard, one-braincelled, teen-and-underwear-model-riddled parallel universe of EastEnders.

For this reason, I choose to go through Newman's latest ego trip interview, with a nitcomb, starting with the picture advertising the interview blog, which can be found here. By the way, the interview was conducted by someone named Nickie L, which just about sums up the calibre of the questions posed.

First, here's the lady of the moment, herself, looking very much like the cat who's just caught the canary.

Let's home she doesn't choke on the feathers.

So let's roll with the interview, and with my interpretation of Lorraine's BBC spin.

Nickie L asks:-

What was your highlight of 2012?

(Me: They always ask this question - as if there were so many highlights from EastEnders for 2012. Actually, there were a fair few - Pat's death and David Wicks's brief return; Simon Wicks's even briefer return; Ian's breakdown, Heather's death, Sharon's return; the revelation of Max's secret and the introduction of his secret wife; Derek's demise. I won't even mention Shaggerman, the storyline was so sordid and badly done). But what was Lorraine's highlight?

It was definitely the Olympic torch episode. Not only was it a great episode, it was a great achievement for EastEnders. It really felt like we connected with the entire country that day. The event was 18 months in the planning. Teaming up with BBC Sport was a first for us and the Olympic Torch Team were so accommodating. On the night itself, when the Olympic Flame arrived, our actors were in total awe. Delivering a live episode is such an incredible team effort and the resulting episode had such warmth and energy to it. I was incredibly proud of Perry (Billy) and Danielle (Lola), who I thought were absolutely amazing. Later that evening, Perry told me that if he'd died that night, he’d have gone with a huge smile on his face. I probably would have too!

In other words, push the BBC Olympic meme to the hilt. After 46 years of hurt, we can now move on from winning the World Cup in 1966 to expostulating about the 2012 London Olympics for the next fifty years - specifically the part about a soap character carrying the Olympic torch.

Nickie L again:-

 If you had one word to sum up your vision for EastEnders in 2013 what would it be?

(This ought to be good.)

 Can I have three? I think warmth, family and friendships. I think you see a side of a person with their friends that you never, ever see with a loved one or with their parents. This year, we also need to focus on our families, and develop our various clans. The Brannings have undoubtedly been a great strength for us over the last few years but what will the show look like in five years time? Who will the big families be? I think it’s about planning for that, to ensure that the show remains incredibly strong and that we utilise the great talent that we’ve got. We have some amazing actors and actresses and it’s important that we have a healthy balance of material.

Roughly put, this means more love affairs (warmth), family (more expansion of the Brannings) and friendships (same old same old). 

This is a load of bullshit, and most of it concerns the Branning satellites (Cora-the-Bora, Ava and Dexter). Admittedly, the show needs to develop friendships. We've had ten years of siblings never going outside the family unit for friendship - the Slater girls (most of whom would be fortysomethings now) never socialised with anyone else, nor did the Fox sisters nor the Mitchell sisters. It's saying something that the firmest friendship on the Square at the moment exists between Alfie Moon and Ian Beale, and why isn't that pursued? At one point in 2007, it looked as though Phil Mitchell and Max Branning would strike a bond, but that exploded. Phil used to be good mates with Ricky - remember him talking about taking Ben and Liam to the park when they were a bit older for a kickabout (this was pre-2000).

Developing "various clans" simply means the Brannings are going to expand. They're expanding already - Kirsty has shown up, and now they're going interracial, with Ava and Dexter on hand. And as much as Lorraine might like to delude herself, the Brannings were at their height when they consisted only of Max,  Bradley, Tanya and the girls, with Dot and Jim on the side. After Stax and certainly after the abysmal attempts on Max's life by his wife and daughter, they started to slide down the slope of pointless sensationalism. They grew like a cancer, and if Newman would care to stop reading tween twitter and the semi-literate comments posted on EastEnders' Facebook and BBC pages, she might realise that the more discerning, more intelligent and long-term viewer thinks the Brannings suck.

As for "amazing actors," you have a few - Jake Wood, Lindsey Coulson, Steve McFadden, Letitia Dean (when she's used correctly), Shane Richie (again, when he's used correctly), Diane Parrish and Adam Woodyatt (when they are used at all); but then you also have a lot of dross as well - underwear and catalogue models with no acting experience hired only for their looks (Tony Discipline, the pathetic David Witts and the anorexic Hetti Bywater), planks or wood who look good (Scott Maslen) and graduates of second-rate wannabe fame schools who believe the PR hyped about them and then spend most of their time consciously on camera, waving their arms about, shouting lines and gurning (Jacqueline Jossa). Your problem, Lorraine, is that you centre most of the badly-written storylines around the actors with the least amount of talent and experience. 

Did I mention that your writing room sucks as well? Well, it does. The writers you employ now are lazy, presumptive and not a patch on some of the legends who used to write memorable episodes and storylines previously - like Sarah Phelps, Tony McHale and the incomparable Tony Jordan.

Nickie L with a real topic-burner:-

So can we expect to see new faces in 2013?

Newman:-

You definitely can. But that’s all I’m saying!

Meaning: Either they're still thinking about Branning perambulations - Suzy has kids, who - five years ago - were teenagers. There's a cousin Gordon someplace. If they're not thinking about a Branning expansion or how to expand them into other dynamics, then they haven't thought of characters to slap onto the Square with no antecedent and no character arc - YES, I'm talking about Ava Hartman, whom Lorraine Newman previously said was originally slated to be part and parcel of a five-episode mini-storyline until Newman faced the actress down in one of EastEnders' infamous workshops and decided then and there she would be a permanent character. So much for the lie about storylines being planned six months, one year and 18 months in advance. This was the same with the Moon Brothers - again, they caught the then-EP's eyes and he decided they had to be part of the EastEnders dynamic.

Nickie L attempting to dig:-

 Let’s look at one of the new faces we already know about. Kirsty arrived on Christmas Day. Can you tell us what kind of impact she’ll have on the Branning family?

I'll be the first to admit that Kirsty was the first interesting new character I've seen on the show for years. Once again, Newman must be deluding herself about the impact of Max's surprise. Anyone who's been watching the damned show for the past five years will know that any and all secrets Max Branning has concern women. And it wasn't rocket science to figure out that Max, being a single man on the rebound from the idiotic Tanya, would be vulnerable enough to fall in love and marry yet again. 

The one good thing about Kirsty at the moment I've noticed (besides the fact that she's portrayed by a highly-rated and BAFTA nominated actress, which means she won't want to make EastEnders her bread-and-butter) is that the BBC Website have given her a backstory and character arc, the likes of which have not been seen since the days of Matthew Robinson, so maybe Lorraine did learn something. Let's see how she uses it.

Newman:-

 It’s like a bomb’s gone off. Not just for Derek, as we saw on Christmas Day, but also for Max andTanya. There’s a bit of a conundrum there - Tanya had rejected Max and when he left, he was devastated. His path crossed with Kirsty at a time when he was clearly trying to deal with his pain from Tanya and now it’s come back to haunt him in a huge way. But Kirsty’s tenacious, she’s not going to let him go.

(She must have a degree in stating the bleeding obvious - a bit like EastEnders).

Nickie L pursuing:-

 Tanya’s tenacious too though, isn’t she?

Newman attempting to be witty:-

She is indeed. It’s not going to be a small fight. Let’s just say - there’s a lot of hair there!

OK, suffice it to say that Newman likes catfights. She's going to try out the atmosphere for such an event in the next few weeks when Roxy and Kat square off in the Vic over Alfie. And, yes, there is a lot of hair between Tanya and her extensions and Kirsty and hers - the obvious irony being that these two lush-haired women are fighting over a scrawny, weasel-faced bald-headed ginger dude. But then, a lot of EastEnders viewers don't appreciate irony. I daresay Newman doesn't either. She's just going for the shock-factor-hard-on-inducing spectacle of watching two women pull hair and wrestle about. They'll all probably be in decolletage as well in hopes of the odd nipple shot. Classy, Lorraine.

Nickie L again,asking the question that's on everyone's lips:-

 Which returning characters will we see in 2013?

Because, ya know, Kat just needs all her sisters around her now, even the one who was sacked for being drunk and who hasn't worked in the industry since because, ya know, the Slater sisters were just so cool. And why not bring back Stacey, with Ryan, married, just to aggravate Janine? And Peter Beale - there's always room for another nineteen year-old male character. Or David Wicks, now that you've successfully retconned a bikeshed bonk between two fourteen year-olds into the next generation's Frank and Pat ... note the obvious and best returnee, the one who could turn this baby around on a dime isn't even mentioned.

Newman:-

 You’ll see a sharp slow-down in returning characters this year. Obviously I’m delighted that we’ve got bothDot returning in the New Year and the return of Janine but we need to be careful to maintain the balance. We have to look forward, look to the future. I think you’ll see an injection of new characters with a sprinkling of old!

I actually agree with slowing down the return of old characters. Obviously, Charlie Brooks and June Brown were on break and have to return; but there is one character who should be asked to return, simply because there are several strings left untied and whose appearance could save this show's bacon ... Ross Kemp. He's open to being asked to return. There are miles of unresolved issues between Grant and Sharon, the most important being Grant is one of two people, besides Phil, who know what Phil said to Dennis Rickman before Dennis beat Jonnie Allen. Bring Grant back, if only for the purpose of having a Sharongate in reverse - or at least to have him knock the living shit out of Jack Branning.

Nickie L again:-

 Can you tell us about Dot’s return?

Newman:-

Dot returns to find that Cora has left her house in chaos so quickly puts that to rights and sends her on her way with a flea in her ear. She also becomes quite a strong matriarchal figure for Poppy and Fatboy. They’re a slightly unusual little family group but they give us huge amounts of joy and warmth which is great. Cora has left quite a timebomb for Dot to contend with.

Well, so much for Cora-the-Bora, Matriarch of Walford. I'll say she's left a mess for Dot, in more ways than one; but I'll be mean enough to admit, I'll enjoy that drunken old hag being foisted onto the streets from whence she came by the Wrath of Dot.

However, Dot taking in waifs and strays is nothing new, and her being matriarchal to Fatboy and Poppy is just a reprise of Dot creating a cosy little family unit with her, Rod and Hazel, the girl who tried to con her with Nick back in the 80s. Dot also took in Donna Ludlow, who killed herself in Dot's front room. And Nigel Bates, who was her boarder. In many ways, Fatboy is a cross between Rod and Nigel. So all Lorraine is doing here is reprising an 80s meme into something for the 21st Century and conning us into believing that this aspect of Dot's character is something uniquely new ... when it's not. Jeez.

Nickie L with a question dear to my heart:-

 And what about Janine’s return? We take it that she isn’t going to come back quietly?

I'm a Janine shipper, the strongest female character on the show and one who's perfectly capable of achieving all she desires without the aid and abeyance of a male. Anyone who's watched the show since Janine first appeared as a sinisterly quiet five year-old and watched her through her three incarnations, understands exactly what makes Janine tick and why she is the way she is. However, since 2000, and especially since her return under Diederick Santer, various EPs have found it easier to plump the "evil Janine" meme. Credit, however, to Bryan Kirkwood. The little good he did was, finally, to develop Janine's character past sugar daddies, sleeping with and blackmailing Ian Beale. Let's see what Newman has in miind ...

Newman:-

 While she’s been away we’ve seen Michael fall head over heels in love with Scarlett – there was some lovely stuff with him and Scarlett over Christmas. And just how will Michael deal with Janine? I can’t imagine either of them will play a fair game! Both Michael and Janine are such fun to write for, the writers get to play out all the things they’ve never had the nerve to do in real life!

All of the above is bullshit for the fact that sensationalism will dominate the landscape when Janine returns to battle Michael for Scarlett. The part about the writers getting to play out all the things they've never had the nerve to do in real life is fucking scary, considering the substandard, lazy, surreal bunch of bozos inhabiting that writing room. I shudder to think.

Nickie L broaching the one subject Newman is seeking to ship over the course of 2013:-

 What plans do you have for Kat and Alfie? Do you think they should be together?

(Because, remember, Newman reiterated in her Digital Spy interview that repairing Kat and restoring the Alfie-Kat dynamic was her priority project for 2013).

Newman (doing a bit of verbal moonwalking):-

Kat needs a little bit of time to find herself again. I personally think that she’s become quite damaged and somewhat lost over the past few years. The cycle that she and Alfie got into became quite painful to watch. We adore Alfie and should be allowed to enjoy that but, more importantly, I think Kat should be allowed to move on too from her history of sexual abuse.

I actually agree with this, but - Lordy - Lorraine Newman, as Series Producer, signed off on Kat-the-Abuser and Alfie-the-Abused as they returned in 2010. She also signed off, without complaint, on the babyswap storyline, which no one in production seems to acknowledge now. At least she seemingly admitted that Kat had been OK when she left, but was fucked up by TPTB, of which Newman was a definite part.

Regarding Kat and her history of sexual abuse, if Newman would care to remember, this was addressed and Kat was redeemed in her first stint. She was redeemed by Alfie's love and understanding. What Kat has done, and what Newman is promoting in the aftermath of the Shaggerman reveal (another pithy secret which almost everyone guessed beforehand), is - guess what? - Kat the Victim. All of a sudden, the meme is that Derek made her cheat on Alfie, he forced her (force, meaning rape), everything from the very beginning was Derek's instigation. That is total bullshit. Too many people remember Kat inviting Derek into the Vic's kitchen and spreading her legs, too many people remember her hiking down her skirt with a curious look of satisfaction on her face as she left the kitchen, too many remember her leaving Alfie in the bed to have a knee-trembler, again, in the alleyway, and too many people heard the contrived voicemail on Derek's phone which indicated that Kat was well up for an extracurricular shag. The first step in Kat moving on from her history of abuse is taking damned responsibility for her actions. She needs to apologise to Alfie - not for getting caught, but for breaking his heart and treating him like a prize piece of shit.

One thing I noticed about the Shaggerman reveal was Alfie referencing Harry, which, effectively exonerates Kat from admitting Harry played a part in her behaviour and puts all the blame on Alfie because the man-hating writers had him admit he couldn't cope with this part of Kat's personal history, and - quite honestly - that's a steaming pile of lying shit.

Newman again:-

So, over the next 12 months, we’ll take Kat on a journey where she’s forced to confront her demons and hopefully come out the other side a stronger person. Her past will always remain with her but I hope that it stops her from continually making the same tortuous mistakes and allows her to find some happiness and peace for herself.

In other words, Kat and Alfie will eventually reconcile - more than likely, Christmas 2013, on their tenth wedding anniversary.

Nickie L again:-

 What do you want for Alfie?

Newman, fudging:-

I want him to be happy! I love having him in the pub, he’s such a breath of fresh air in there, and now he’s started a tentative relationship with Roxy. Roxy, being Roxy, obviously jumped in there head-first-think-later, and then the panic of 'Oh no, I really like him! I want this to be serious, what am I doing!?’ hits her with a bang.

Inevitably she will have huge wobbles as to whether he is on the rebound and he will have to prove to her otherwise. So we’ll have some fun with them as they embark on this new journey.

Kabuki theatre. They'll make it so cute and saccharin that the viewers will be begging for Alfie to reunite with Kat. Con job.

Nickie L, getting into the real emphasis of EastEnders - teen storylines:-

Will Lola get Lexi back? Please say she will!

(Please, please, oh pretty please with a cherry on top!)

 Newman:-

Would the audience ever forgive me if she didn’t?! The question is when and how? I love the friendship group of Jay, Abi and Lola – and with Ava’s son Dexter crossing in to that group too, it becomes stronger still. The strength and support of that friendship will help to give her confidence for the future.

Oh, goody! Not only do we have an older group of teens with which to contend, we now have a younger one - although Dexter is twenty. An awful lot of long-term viewers don't like Lola, see her for the bad attitude chav she really is and see through the stupid contrivance of allowing her to have a kid hoping that the viewers will forgive her obvious and previous bad behaviour. Bad character played by a bad and inexperienced reality television star. Another victim. Lola commits a crime - it's not fair she's punished because (take your pick) she's sixteen/she's a single mum/she was brought up in care yadda yadda. One thing Danielle Harold is not and that's the new Lacey Turner, and I was never a fan of One-Trick-Pony Turner.

Nickie L, with the absolute most ignorant, shallow and dumbass question of all time in a serious BBC interview with a BBC executive:-

 Our audience won’t forgive us if we don’t ask you if you’ll have more topless Joey Branning in 2013?

Really, Nickie, who the fuck are you? And how much of my licence fee is being used on your over-inflated salary to ask a question like that? EastEnders isn't a fucking beauty contest and it's not a repository for ex-underwear models whose only stage experience has been in a gay porn review. Why not ask if we're going to see Joey learn to breathe through his nose and keep his mouth from hanging agape? Or if we're going to see Joey speak so the vast majority of the audience will understand what he's saying? Or, why not ask a hard one ... why the hell some inexperienced, totally talentless actor landed a major role on the BBC's flagship programme on the basis of looks only? Ask THAT, Nickie. I fucking dare you!

Newman titters:-

 How gratuitous!! I take all my actors and actresses stories and storylines very seriously!! And wouldn’t dream of planning such blatant behaviour! (Smiles wickedly….)

Har-dee-har-har-har ... meaning, she is so fucking craven and desperate to get bums on seats and get the tweens hot, bothered and tweeting votes for the popularity contest part of the BSAs that she'll do anything. If she could get away with David Witts gadding about the Square naked and wiggling his erect cock at the camera in hopes that thousands of frustrated teenaged girls everywhere experience their first orgasm, she'd do it. Classy, Lorraine. Real classy.

Nickie L, pushing and spinning:-

 But seriously, what’s in store for Joey and Lauren?

Newman (proof positive that her head is up her arse):-

 Lauren’s obviously very troubled. A huge amount of what we’re seeing now is to do with what’s been going on with her parents for such a long time. It’s a tough one covering the issue of binge drinking because inevitably, in order for it to have sufficient impact, it has to go on for a considerable amount of time. There’s a real danger that it will become unpalatable and that you won’t have too much empathy for the character.

Total Bullshit. Lauren is arguably the most pejorative adolescent character ever to appear on the show. She has no ambition, she's lazy, entitled, selfish, self-absorbed, immature and simply unlikeable. If Newman is worried about Lauren losing empathy with the viewers, she needs to tear herself away from teenaged wet dreams and read some of what the more perspicacious and longer-term viewers are saying about this lazy actress who is always very conscious of the camera lingering on her. That she's the obvious go-to actress, who's being shipped in every episode of EastEnders is obvious. Newman wants to remember what happened to Brookside when they decided to push the dubious talents of Clare Sweeney. It failed and died. Oh, and Laurenis a drunk, and what' "tough" about covering her story is just a piss poor excuse for you to give her a sudden cure and you can move on without addressing what has to go on in rehab for people with drinking problems, and you need to explore the part Lauren's mother, aunt  and grandmother have played in her alcohol dependence, because all of them are, also, alcoholics of a degree. I'm sure, Lorraine, you're more than familiar with  Seven Shades of Grey; well, you should do your flaming research and realise that there are seven shades of alcoholic - and Cora the Bora, Tanya, Rainie and Lauren are just four.

Newman spinning:-

But Jacq’s a fantastic actress and I think that those moments of vulnerability that we get from her are amazing. The moment after the car crash where Joey walked away from her was just heartbreaking and the pair of them together are just gorgeous. We weren’t sure quite how their being cousins would sit with the audience but the audience do seem to adore them as a pairing over and above this. So there’s clearly still plenty of story to unfold there.

Sorry, no, she's not - and too many people see that she's a lazy actress who depends on over-exaggerated arm movement, shouted lines and gurning faces. She's all to aware of the camera on her and she's all too aware that she's pretty - ever since the BBC paid for her collagen implant in her upper lip and her boob job in order to emphasise a passing resemblance to Jennifer Lawrence, without Lawrence's talent.

Lorraine's so turned on by the pretty picture of two pretty people falling in love suddenly with each other on the show that  she's creaming her knickers. Lauren and Joey were paired up because they fucking look good together. Nothing more. Nothing less. The actor is dire and the actress stopped acting as soon as she started believing the hype generated about her. The apple didn't fall far from the tree.

If you really want to take the Lauren-Joey dynamic further, let him get her up the duff and let her have a baby which comes out looking like Alice the Goon from the Popeye cartoons.

 Because this is what happens when the bloodlines are too close.

Newman:-

We will see Lauren’s story come to a peak next year but how will she deal with it? Will she come out the other side? What kind of impact is it going to have on her family? And, again, it’s a huge issue story, something that’s effecting so many teens, and the impact that it’s having on the parents and the siblings is huge, it’s something we’ll be going into major detail with.

Excuse my French, but fuck you for patronising the viewers' intelligence. This will be a storyline which will drag on and the resolve will last little over one week. Chelsea Fox's cocaine addiction was over in the space of two episodes. Phil Mitchell beat his crack addiction within a week. We never saw Ian Beale's counselling sessions, and the fragrant Lauren will not go to rehab - no, no, no. She'll puke a bit of blood, shit herself and have an epiphany. Fuck you for insulting our intelligence. Who do you think you are?

Nickie L:-

 What are the other issues that you want to cover in 2013?

EastEnders does issues now? News to me.

Newman:-

 It’s really important to reflect what’s going on in the UK – poverty’s clearly a big issue effecting so many people in so many different ways. The ongoing issue with Lola  will come to the fore and there are a couple of major medical issues which I’d like to explore next year…

Hmmm ... poverty. Looks like Bianca. smells like Bianca. How about doing some research into benefits, Lorraine? Lola struggling with Lexi, and being manipulated by Dexter in order to get around Phil. Read that one a mile off.

Major medical issues? Let me help you out there ... Jack and Kat are walkind STDs. Deal with that and the epidemic they caused - Jack could spread it to Sharon and she could spread it to Phil. Kat's infected Alfie, who's infected Roxy ... the beat goes on.

Nickie L:-

 You looked at the issue of adoption this year, with Cora’s storyline. What’s in store for Cora and Ava?

Nickie, you are stupid. This was a story about racism and the culture than engendered not only unwed mothers in the Fifties and Sixties, but also unwed mothers who were carrying bi-racial children.

Newman:-

Ava and Cora have a very tricky relationship and I think what’s quite interesting about Ava. Ava remains hesitant, partly due to the fact that she is aware that if Tanya hadn’t intervened and contacted her, Cora would not have sought her out at all. Ultimately she’s tentative for fear of being hurt.

They’re quite spiky around each other and find it difficult to open up with each other. They’re actually very similar characters, both quite stubborn, which makes it even more difficult to overcome that first hurdle. Ava will initially develop a stronger relationship with Tanya than she will have with Cora. It’s far easier for her to find out about the family without it feeling so intrusive. As mentioned, we will also see the introduction of Dexter who’s Ava’s son, and we’ll set Ava and Dexter up as a unit of their own.

Both Ava and Dexter will be involved in a big story with Bianca next year, which will help to introduce them both more into the Square. Dexter will also start working as a mechanic in the Arches and he and Jay will become very good friends.

Well, already we know that Ava will get a job at a school in Walford. If Ava's like Cora the Bora, she's also a drunk and smokes like a chimney. I'm all for believing Ava isn't as nice or as positive a character as she seems. First of all, she's a well-educated, well-spoken professional in a position of trust. Dr May, Stella, Lucas Johnson and Yusef were all nice people, initially, before their psychosis took over.

As far as Bianca is concerned, Dexter will probably shag Tiffany and probably get her up the duff; Ava will probably be involved with trying to educate Bianca up to some sort of acceptable standard, but I also expect her to "help" Masood get over Zainab's desertion whilst helping him get his teaching qualification, which he will achieve in record time due to bonking the boss. Spare me.


 Nickie L:-

What’s next for Sharon and Jack… and Phil? What does Sharon get from each of them?

(Here we go).

Newman:-

 I think Phil makes Sharon feel safe. He knows her warts and all. And I think it’s the same for him – she knows and understands his family, which is a big ask for anybody! The real danger for them is that we know that Sharon is addicted to medication and Phil has a history as an addict, so potentially it’s a very, very dangerous combination. This is something that she’s aware of too. I’m sure that’s one thing that is telling her to keep him at arm’s length.

You stupid woman. This isn't Rainie and Phil indulging. Phil has always wanted to love and protect Sharon, and Sharon, knowing his history, would naturally draw from his strength. If anything will keep Phil away from his addictions, it's the desire to be strong for Sharon. If you think this is the reason Sharon is keeping Phil at arm's length, being her fear of his addiction, you've learned fuck-all from your twenty years at EastEnders. You'd best go back to typing scripts, because - I tell you - if you couple Sharon with Jack Branning, EastEnders will have truly jumped the shark. You're in the realms of Brookside now.

Newman:-

 With Jack it’s the opportunity to start afresh, wipe the slate clean and be who she wants to be, so again that’s quite attractive. But we all know that for Sharon, her past is really important to her, that’s why that draw to Phil is never going to go away. Three people in that marriage, I feel!

The only marriage on the cards should be Sharon and Phil. That's the beauty of history. And you should grow a pair and realise that Scott Maslen may be a nice man, but he contributes nothing to the show. Maybe you should think of Jack addressing the appalling way he neglects all three of his children by different mothers. Jack is the biggest slut, bar Kat, on the Square. Deal with that!

 Nickie L: (notice how the questions and answers are getting increasingly more puerile?)

We saw a couple of unexpected partnerships in 2012, like Fatboy and Denise. Will we see any more of those in 2013?

Newman:-

 Ooh we like to surprise! I really enjoyed Fatboy and Denise and the audience appeared to too. It was unexpected and really gently and sweetly handled which I think is why it worked so incredibly well - and of course the audience adore Fatboy which is also a bonus. He’s obviously now got his new lady and he’ll be settling down over Christmas, which you may have seen in the red button. Next year we enjoy exploring the new relationship that is Fatboy and Poppy. And Denise will be on a new journey herself next year which I think the audience will also enjoy…

Pardon me ... the audience likes Fatboy? Since when? He's redundant. And the one thing the audience hates is contrived romcom. That isn't EastEnders, and Poppy is one of a long line of female village idiots, the likes of which started with Little Mo Slater, continued with Honey Mitchell and now the torch is passed to Poppy. I'm only surprised Billy Mitchell isn't staking a claim. As for Denise, cut the crap. She's going to be paired with Ian, in another contrived romcom way that's insulting to both characters. Again, don't insult our intelligence.

Nickie L (the end being near):-

 This will be your first New Year as Exec on EastEnders. Are you enjoying it?

Newman:-

It is an amazing job, absolutely amazing, and slightly surreal as well! It’s only when you step out of here that you realise quite how strange it is. But I’m totally loving it and looking forward to 2013!

Apologies for my anger, but the only thing surreal about EastEnders is the fantasy which the likes of Newman and her inadequate bunch of arrogant writers are promoting. History is abandoned, retconning flourishes and heretofore non-existent family members abound. EastEnders has lost its realism, and Newman sounds as if she's too fluffy and insignificant to restore it to its greatness. Instead, she's content to turn it into a shallow teenaged soap - Neighbours on the Thames.

EPIC FAIL.