EastEnders: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly - Review: 26.04.2013

According to Digital Spy, EastEnders is odds-on the bookies' favourite to come away from the BSAs next month with the Best Soap gong.

I hope not.

I know those awards given by public vote amount to nothing more than a glorified popularity contest and mean nothing in terms of quality and execution, but TPTB at the helm of the show are just arrogant enough and suffering from such a terminal case of headuparseitis ...

(Lorraine Newman)

that they just might think such an award might be evidence that what they're doing is fine and it's what the public want.

What frightens me is that the show just might win the award, and that would truly be a crime. The award would be won on the backs of such high-browed hyuck-hyuck viewers like the woefully semi-literate xTonix, who would watch the show if it were nothing more than the BBC test symbol, or the shipper-in-chief dan2008, who is the biggest apologist for EastEnders not to be on its payroll, and I'm still not sure he isn't on the payroll. Or IceDragon1 or Falling Piano or the notorious monalisa, any of that lot, plus the Walford Web bullyboi stalwarts Willie Wanker Mitchell Slutter (or whatever) Bex-the-man and other assorted creatures ... all of whom will find ways to vote multiple times in order to ensure an EastEnders win ... and a licence for Lorraine to carry on with her warm, fuzzy and bland poop, her teenfesta and beautiful people, her tripe.

Remember last year's after-party when Perry Fenwick admitted to being gob-smacked that EastEnders won the award, when he clearly thought Coronation Street would be the recipient?

The awful truth is that EastEnders shouldn't win the awary, and if they do, it's a sham, a betrayal of the show and of the fans who've watched since the beginning or at least for the past two decades.

And it will be a triumph for the brain-dead.

I thought it couldn't be done, and I was right. We've had three episodes of reasonably good quality, then the week is finished with the usual mediocrity - not entirely bad, but not the better quality of the rest of the week.

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

The Good.

Well, it's Janine, isn't it? Anything with Charlie Brooks is watchable, and thus far, her return has been spot-on. She's not a full-on pantomime bitch; she's still vulnerable, and she's being victimised and passively-aggressively bullied by her psychopathic husband and the doltishly naive Alice (whose face becomes more and more slappable with each episode.)

So besotted is she with Michael and his "rights," that she doesn't realised she's being played like a fiddle and strung up like a kipper. In short, she's being used. She's been being used all along, doing all the heavy work with his child - and really, who would trust someone as inexperienced as Alice with a small baby? She's had no dealings with infants or young children; indeed, she's a sheltered virgin, compared to all the other sluts-in-training ripping around Walford.

For anyone thinking otherwise, if you watch the toddler scene again, Janine isn't bored with the set-up at all, but she's tense and nervous under scrutiny and also vulnerable, recognising that Michael is doing exactly the same thing, albeit differently, as he did when she was on the Square before. Passive-aggressive bullying, marginalising her. In fact, I'll wager that this was the first time Michael had actually been to that group. It's something that he would entrust the insipid Alice to do, and if you notice, he's just holding the child, it's Alice who's doing all the interacting.

I felt sorry for Janine, the way her piece-of-shit husband and his creature were patronising her at the end of the toddlers' group, chipping away at her confidence around Scarlett. I hated Alice's puke-inducing nicknme of "Scarlie" and I loved Janine's put-down of her. And Scarlett's "itinerary"? Really? You cannot tell me that it's Michael who goes swimming with her or to "sign and mime?" 

Sign and mime? 

The kid is only ten months old. What the fuck is "sign and mime" for a ten month-old? And I would definitely not trust dippy Alice taking my infant swimming.

For anyone thinking Janine found that hard going because she's "not maternal," I beg to differ. She found it hard-going, because - like Jean with Ian the previous day - she recognised all the signs that Michael was manipulating her again.

I'll keep saying it - anyone who wants a psychopath to get full custody of a child is just sick, themselves. Michael is a psychopath. He isn't ever going to change. Never. Ever. And any child cursed with a parent like that is in serious trouble.

The biggest fool of all is Alice, who believes in his sincerity; but then she's the only person who regarded a father she hardly knew as a saint.

I'm glad Janine's got Billy in a position of trust, and I'm equally glad that Billy also knows how far he can go in that trust relationship. His scenes with Ian were great tonight, from  his "Mr Vader" line to his executive pose and "Impress me."

Either Ian was desperate, or he truly believed Billy's power capacity in his sales pitch about his restaurant. The look on his face when Billy closed the "deal," and then told him that he was almost 50% certain that Janine would okay the venture was classic. The ultimate irony of those scenes was that, usually, it's Billy who's come, cap-in-hand, to Ian mooching and begging a job or some favour. I'm reminded of the offhand and disdainful way Ian used to treat Billy when Billy worked for him on the stall, especially the year when Billy and Honey were about to get evicted from Mrs Patel's flat, and Billy was so destitute, he was actually stealing from Ian and Peggy. Now the shoe is on he other foot, and Billy's going to milk this situation. If nothing else, at least he got a free lunch, although his ploughman's didn't have any pickle.

The Bad ... Where Do I Begin?

Well, there's Max and Kirsty. Again. Kirsty's hair is beginning o annoy me seriously. There's too much of it, and it looks too dirty. So all this subterfuge was about them getting a flat and Max having to okay it with Tanya that he is living just across the Square from her?

They even almost got a blessing and a plant from The Magic Negro, who - guess what? - isn't teaching again today. Please, stop this insulting pretense that Ava the Rava is a Deputy Head or that she's even a teacher. All she does is waft about Walford all day, popping up here and there to spread either wisdom or venom, depending on the person on the receiving end.

Max only found out he'd got the flat that morning, so how did she surmise someone was moving in so she could buy a housewarming plant? And how rude - the minute she saw the occupants were Max and Kirsty, she leaves in a huff.

I truly don't understand this. She has not bonded with Tanya, nor does she identify with her in any way; and yet, she sits in judgement on Max Branning without knowing any of the details of that situation - the circumstances under which he met and married Kirsty? Does she not realise that Tanya is just as amoral as Max, except that she masks her amorality behind petty hypocrisy and self-victimisation?

Please. Who is this woman? She couldn't wait to apprise silly Lauren (see below) of the fact that Max and Kirsty had - shock horror! - got a flat. Why is she, and more to the point, why are the two spoiled Branning bitchbrats upset that Max has found a place to live and has chosen to live on the Square? He was a divorced man when he married Kirsty, and he can live anyplace he liked. They never had any problem with Tanya pitching up with gormless Greg to live on the Square across the way from Max and Vanessa, so why their reactions to this? Where did they expect Max to live? In a hole?

Jesus, these people are too full of themselves.

And speaking of teen angst ...

Oh ... goody goody gumdrops, Jay's finished Community Service! Let's have a party, a get-together in the Vic ...just for originality. And we'll meet at lunchtime, and The Magic Negro will be there drinking (alcohol, when she should be at school teaching or administrating).

Gosh, talk about variations on a theme. For a moment there, I thought I was watching a 1930s kidult move, as in "Let's put on a show!"

Somebody's got the message about Abi the Dough-Faced Girl. Her thighs and arse are massive, so now she hides her thighs with the biggest cushion possible and wears a wide-bottomed jacket over her wide bottom. EastEnders should do a fatfarm special, starring Morgan and Abi.

And since when does Jay merit a key to the Branning house? Or is Tanya now condoning him and Abi sleeping together in a house where her young child lives? I'm waiting for Abi to give up on her exams and become another teenaged bride who'll be divorced by the time she's twenty, when she's axed or Jamie Borthwick decides to try something else.

Lucy was working, run off her feet, in the cafe. But what were the other assholes doing? I thought Tyler with his ridiculous hat, had a market stall. In fact, I thought Kat and Bianca should have been on the stall, but Bianca kept screaming down the phone and Kat kept whining about having to do her bookkeeping and wanting to know if you have to pay taxes if you're skint. (Short answer? If you're self-employed, yes). Whitney's hours at her daycare centre are as haphazard as The Magic Negro's teaching, and Joey doesn't really seem to work anyplace anymore. If he works at the club, surely he'd be fast abed in the morning, having to do late hours.

Who knows and who cares? This gag-a-maggot storyline was just another excuse to showcase the abysmal non-talent of 

The. Worst. Actress. Ever. In. EastEnders.

Please, someone send this poor excuse of an actress to a masterclass to learn how to play a drunken person. I've seen all sorts of drunks in my time, but I've never seen one who whoops and yelps like Lauren does ....

Woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Line of the night. Not. The only thing positive I'd say about this scene is that Lauren's drunkeness shows precisely how vile a person she is, because as the old saying goes, in vino veritas ... a person's real personality comes to the fore when they're drunk, and Lauren's line tonight in celebration of Jay finishing his community service - Hevvah Trot is forgot - was nothing short of despicable. The only thing missing from that scene was Shirley hanging around within earshot of that remark and nutting Lauren roundly about the head.

What a totally cruel, self-obsessed and mean remark to make.

As for Lucy's spiking of the drink ... well, anyone with any common sense would taste the alcohol in a drink that's been spiked, especially when a double shot of the stuff had been put in the lemonade. Even insipid Alice, who was a teetotal when Lucy spiked her drink last year (spiking drinks seems to be Lucy's particular party piece), should have noticed that her soft drink tasted suspiciously different than normal; but this is EastEnders, and I suppose the writers are as stupid as the characters they portray.

I know we're supposed to be Team Lauren the Lip in this one, but I'm glad Lucy did that, if for nothing else than, as I said above, it showed Lauren in her true colours and made all the other numpties, who should be shitting themselves at the thought of receiving their P45s and UB40s, an excuse to distance themselves from this social pariah; but then Lucy only did it because she's jealous that Lauren's fucking Cousin Joey.

Joey's line:

Laurr-arrggh Ah caydodis. (Lauren, I can't do this) ...which should mean: Lauren, I can't go on fucking you because you're my cousin and that's wrong. It's creepy and sick.

Ach, who am I kidding? It doesn't mean that at all, it just means he can't be around a stinky, drunken sodding little spoiled bitch any longer.

Good. Does that mean he's going to leave? Maybe he can ride the other wooden plank known as Tyler out of Walford?

I guess this is the beginning of Lauren's big drinking issue storyline at which we'll all be riveted. Not.

The Ugly - Kane, Bianca's Voice and Another Piece of Retconned Shit.

I find it hard to believe Harry Rafferty is a model. I find it even harder to believe he calls himself an actor. This guy has got a seriously disturbing face, as well as no acting talent. And why does he talk like a black kid? Was Kane originally supposed to be black and was re-cast as white at the last moment in a fit of specious political correctness suffered by Lorraine Newman and masqueraded as the vapours? I wonder, because when he tried to denote a soupcon of emotion, quoting his "it costs nothing to be polite" line his mother always said, he did so in a strong West Indian accent; and Kane isn't even bi-racial. (Nor is Ava the Rava for that matter, but EastEnders banks on the viewers' collective stupidity.)

The tension stoked in last night's episode evaporated into nothing tonight. A real menace like Kane wouldn't have thought twice about knifing Liam for the grass he was considered to be. The fact that he thought the police would even believe a retraction of Liam's statement wasn't protracted under duress was totally lost on this retard, and his interest in Liam seemed more psycho-sexual than anything else.

Of course, the climax (pun intended) of the entire vignette and, indeed, the storyline, itself, was all about Bianca. It was her reaction, her manner of dealing with the situation and how the denouement affected her. And that was cheesy and second-rate. Again, it was a showcase for the infamous Patsy Palmer scream, as she lunged at Liam's attacker. Message: Bianca is the feral mother who protects her young. Did she not stop to think that a no-mark like Kane would be so familiar with the system that he could play it to the point that she could have been done for assault, and she, being on licence, would be sent back to prison?

And now for the big retcon moment. Bianca stated tonight that Ricky never once came to see her when she was in prison the last time.

That is a blatant, blatant lie, and Carey Andrews wants to heave up off her lazy arse and fucking do some research from the archives - from last JUNE, I might add. When Ricky returned for Janine's wedding, bringing Tiffany and Morgan in tow, he told Janine that he'd been to the prison to visit Bianca several times and that they were getting along better. Yet tonight, she specifically said that Ricky never bothered to visit, and that as far as he was concerned, his attitude to the children was "out of sight, out of mind" and even implied that Ricky wanted to see Liam more than Liam wanted to see Ricky.

Well, here is proof that Ricky visited Bianca - his words, she "lets him visit her now" (4:30 mark) and this is from June 2012:-

And if it has to be repetition for emphasis, once again, here's Ricky's departure episode from January 2012, complete with his full distress at leaving his children, especially Liam (from the 6:00-minute mark):-

OK, I realise that it might tax a low-information viewer's intelligence to remember something from 15 months ago, but someone like a professional writer should be au fait with a significant moment in the show's history. For all he was gormless, Ricky Butcher was an important part of EastEnders' folklore and the scion of an iconic family. But there really is no excuse for writer or viewer not to remember something from 10 fucking months previously.

The reality of this show at this point is that the lazy writing room, signed off by Simon Ashdown and Lorraine Newman, write tripe, more than often making up background, irregardless of recorded fact, as they go along to fit the storyline and the character's circumstances. And they do it, because they can. Because the viewing public who still loves this cack haven't a collective braincell to rub together and don't even know what critical thinking is. They can't fathom a character can be a good person with bad traits or a bad person showing some sort of good. They haven't the capacity to recognise that Phil Mitchell can show remorse, that he can show restraint; that Max Branning is capable of loving his children and showing compassion, but his character flaws prohibit him from doing it in a purely conventional way; that Janine can really care for her family and see that they are provided for or even recognise that she's basically an insecure person with massive trust issues, instead of the pantomime "evil Janine."

Because of this, not only is it easy for the writers to retcon at will, it's also easier for them to present formerly nuanced characters as one-dimensional props. Alfie Moon originally had a dark side to him and wasn't above smacking his wayward wife. Roxy Mitchell had a wry sense of humour and some wicked one-liners. Bianca was once intelligent enough to run a business on her own and win a place at fashion college. Now she's the village idiot and a rampant chav with no modicum of commonsense.

Thank goodness James Forde has left. I would reckon that if Liam returns (and please let this be the beginning of an exodus of a plethora of needless teenaged characters), he'll return with a new head and played by someone closer to Liam's real age of fourteen and not someone old enough to be classed as an adult. But Bianca's last shrieked, stage-managed line, "We won!" is something I hope isn't shrieked by anyone connected with this programme next month at the British Soap Awards.

Because after such an abysmal year, such lazy writing, a plethora of such unlikeable characters  in whom the thinking public find it hard to invest any interest or emotion, they simply don't deserve anything but a kick up their collective arse to do better.

And even that's doubtful.