With news out today that Jamie Lomas's character, Jake Stone, is going to be romantically involved with the ...
SECOND. WORST. ACTRESS. EVER. IN. EASTENDERS.
I say ... PUKE.
I know TPTB are pushing Jossa as the go-to girl and ingenue of the moment. I know when she returns to the screen sporting a Mexican tan and highlights in her hair, we'll be asked to root for and be sympathetic to poor, misguided Lauren; but the truth is, she's the most unlikeable, immature and entitled person on the show, and I can't see a thirtysomething like Lomas's Stone is supposed to be falling for a nineteen year-old lazy, rude, entitled little bitch.
It's obvious TPTB are channelling Tiffany Raymond maturing from material girl into sweetness personified, who had to endure Grant Mitchell as a husband, before tragically meeting her end; but Lauren isn't Tiffany. She isn't anywhere near to Tiffany.
I would have tagged Lomas as Roxy's squeeze after being dumped by Alfie, but it looks as though Roxy's also being sacrificed at the altar of the Branning non-virgin.
The only good things that will come of this will be (a) that Peter Beale won't be romantically linked with Lauren yet again. That could be good, and that could be bad. He could become an item with Lola, which may work to Lola's ultimate good; or he could be paired again with thedirty skank most undelectably orange Whitney.
The other good thing is that this, surely, will mean the departure of Walford's resident Mouth-Breather-In-Chief ...
Joey Branning.
Such a shame Lauren can't leave as well.
Onward to tonight's fare ...
Two Village Idiots and a Bitter Bitch.
EastEnders definitely has a recurrent theme of man-hating, making men appear weak, gormless and ineffectual.
The four main male characters in the show at the moment are (or should be) Phil Mitchell, Ian Beale, Alfie Moon and Max Branning. They should be the principal male leads - not perfect, genuinely flawed, but veering towards the positive. Instead, especially since the Kirkwood era, the writing for three of them (Phil, Alfie and Ian) has been abysmal, and Max has been turned into a cartoon.
They've not just been presented as tragically flawed, they've been presented as pejorative beings. Phil's a wanton thug and a villain (something he's never been). Alfie is a doormat (not even conceivable in his previous stint). Ian has got to be co-dependent on some female who's sleeping with him to the point that he's bullied by his atrocious daughter (Ian Beale has lost his acerbidity). And Max cannot love whatever woman he's with until this symptom turns out to be a sad joke.
The whole brouhaha, which resulted in Ian's latest business venture going up in smoke came about via the absolute stupidest of misunderstandings. So stupid that it's reflected in the even more innate stupidity of the witnesses to the occurrence.
I'm Team Ian on this all the way.
Jean is a blithering village idiot, an annoying screeching bag of hot air, New Age philosophy and precious little common sense. And dumb as fuck. In fact, she's so damned dumb, she makes Heather (who got a mention from Shirley as she wallowed in self-pity) look like Einstein.
Anyone present earlier in the day (read: the last episode), when Jean produced the perfect souffle', would know that Ian wasn't sexually harassing Jean in the least. He was pleased, suprised and grateful that her attempt had turned out so well. He was kissing her, on the cheek, with delight at her effort.
Is Ian a demanding boss? Yes, but being a sous-chef is a demanding job, as Ian should have realised when he offered this position to Jean and something she should have realised as well when she took it.
Jean totally overreacted to Ian's behaviour, based entirely on that shitty horoscope, which she believed, word for word, and on Ian's "little treat" of giving her a glass of wine.
In fact, Jean's overreaction is precisely the way a lot of sexual harassment cases begin - in total innocence on the man's part.
What was either stupid or low or both, were Poopy-La-Dim's and Shitney's interpretations of what happened. As I said, anyone with a modicum of common sense could see the context in which Ian kissed Jean. Poopy, as we know, has her shallow-brained head entrenched so far up her skinny arse, that she would interpret this situation differently. At the moment, she's caught up in her ego and image as a part of nouveau management in her own little empire, and I imagine sweet Poopy is something of a passive-aggressive little bitch in her own right.
As for Whitney, she's clued up enough to know exactly what Ian was about in his approach to Jean, and her reaction was simply malicious - as were her rude comments about Ian being a "perv." Ian, whether she cares to admit it or not, is family, and he's actually giving her a second chance and an opportunity to save for her wedding by giving her this job. The old Ian Beale wouldn't have had her within throwing distance of his restaurant.
Even worse that all that, was Denise's reaction, believing the bevy of Jean, Poopy-La-Dim and Whitney over Ian, himself. Ian is still fragile emotionally and psychologically, and to treat him the way she did, even suggesting that they split, is sheer stupidity.
Arguably the best scene of the evening came between Ian and Denise back at the B and B, when he was explaining to her how he came to value success - with plenty of good continuity and past reference. It's true that Pete Beale was less than ambitious. His life's plan never extended past running the family fruit and veg stall and, as Ian described, putting in the hours and then putting your feet up. It's also true that Pete thought catering an effeminate profession, and - in a coincidental reference to what became the first instance in which Julia's Theme was used - how he used to seek solace from his grandmother Lou Beale. This was one of the first times, if not the first, where Ian Beale totally explained how he became fixated on money and financial success - as a means of proving his father wrong.
Another aspect of the new and improving Ian Beale, is admitting that he is actually punching above his weight with Denise and admitting that he was always worried that his relationship with her would end, sooner rather than later, even grimly accepting what he thought was the end of his romance with Denise. Adam Woodyatt stepped up to the plate tonight.
Meanwhile, back at the Bitch Ranch, Jean's solution to her so-called "sexual harassment" is to de-camp to the Vic and drink an assortment of colourful cocktails, in the company of Shirley and Bianca.
Shirley makes minimum wage working in the Minute Mart and pays a sixty-quid-a-night room in the B and B, quickly becoming the local dosshouse.; Bianca is terminally poor, working on a tat stall for a pittance to keep her puling brats in chicken nuggets. So both of them are seen propping up the bar in the Vic, as you do, listening to Jean, bolstered by Whitney, witter on and on about Ian's behaviour, linked inextricably to her horoscope from the previous day.
Here's an observation: Tuesday's episode centred on the lunchtime fare at Scarlett's, and the souffle' was for Carl's lunch. Now all of a sudden, in this episode, it's evening time, and Carl's got the souffle for his dinner. So the entire action in today's episode takes place in the evening of the same day as Tuesday's episode.
As I said, time and drunkenness pass quickly in Walford. Go figure.
Since Jean insists on showing Shirley and Bianca her latest horoscope, which is in her bag back at the restaurant, tanked up, they re-enter the empty restaurant to search for the bag, first lighting a plethora of candles and eventually finding a bottle of wine to drink. As you do.
This is another rank stupidity. Shirley is a fiftysomething grandmother, who's bitter, twisted and with enough of misplaced entitlement to vandalise someone's hard-earned establishment, taking whatever isn't nailed down. Even more stupid, is Bianca. She's illegally entered a closed establishment and helped herself to goods without paying for them. That's stealing, and that means, if Ian were to return, she could be arrested and summarily sent back to prison. Once again, you'd think she would have known better.
Instead, they sit about, drinking Ian's wine and trash-talking Ian, with Bianca taking the high moral road of telling about Ian paying for prostitutes, and bitchily remarking about Janine having been a prostitute. Er, really, Bianca? What about your grandmother Pat? Or even Whitney? And even though she didn't actually charge money for it, Bianca certainly put it about a bit, as well as being guilty of GBH and theft.
The discovery of Ian's special bottle of whiskey also becomes Shirley's bitter soliloquy about her real dislike of Ian Beale - the fact that he knew what Ben did and then did nothing. Once again ... really, Shirley? It's so totally unjust that, a year after Ian's monumental breakdown, he's got this trophy restaurant, whilst she's stuck in one room in a doss house.
Even the putridly retarded Bianca is in agreement that Ian doesn't deserve his success, not that she's above working hard for such a goal. Nope, things have to be handed to Bianca.
So Shirley now includes Ian in her blame game for Heather's death. Ian said nothing about Ben's involvement, unbeknownst to Shirley, because he was being horrifically bullied by Phil into keeping schtum about Ben's involvement. And Shirley really should look in the mirror, because she betrayed Heather also, by not revealing Phil's involvement in Heather's murder. Phil's free, and he's ended his relationship with Shirley. Ian's worked to overcome his problems of the last year; Shirley had the opportunity to build a new life with her daughter and grandson and chose to return to live in a sordid doss house and work at a dead-end job ... and this is Ian's fault? For this, Ian deserves to be robbed and vandalised?
Jean acquiescing to Shirley's convoluted, drunken and self-pitying rationale was bad, the fact that, after the fire had started, the damaged enhanced by the sprinkler system starting, all three of the women left, screeching and laughing; and a drunken Kim spotted the water damage and simply shrugged and walked on.
These women suck. Truly, and I wouldn't blink if all four of them were shown the door. Vile bitches. And stupid.
The Prince of Darkness in Waiting.
Personally, Janine's and Michael's mind games are beginning to get a bit boring. This is a major problem of EastEnders. They latch onto an aspect of a story and ... lather, rinse, repeat. Again and again and again. Ad infinitum.
I think we're in for much of the same with Michael and Janine. In fact, so confusing is this harebrained action that no one is sure who's being played. On the face of it, Michael expects his instructions to Janine not to return to Walford, would be taken as an open invitation to return. That's too easy to anticipate.
On the face of it, again, it seems Janine has snaked an admission from Michael, taped illicitly, that he wants her back in Walford because she's the mother of his child. So the entire hiring-firing-hiring facade with Billy was a ruse, and Billy Mitchell - Billy Mitchell - has one-upped Michael Moon.
Yes, so the question in this instance is, who's zooming whom? We'll never know, and by the end of the storyline, I suppose we'll be thoroughly bored with it.
Interesting scenes, however, between Michael and Jack Branning tonight, as Jack did a bit of midnight cleaning in his flat. Jack Branning actually admitted to being a crap parent, calling himself a weekend parent. He's not even that. It's been a couple of years since he's seen Penny, and he hasn't seen Richard since he was born, although the mention of the one child who did count, James, was notable foreshadowing that James's mother is returning imminently.
Even more prescient was Michael's remarks about a father being around for the child's birth, then assing off for eighteen years, leaving the mother with the hard work, and deeming the mother of said child a "horrible mother."
This wasn't just a reference to Janine. Michael has serious, very serious mother issues. I fear his leaving line will have much to do with this, but it won't be suicide - at least, not intentionally.
The Most Pointless Characters in the Show.
Ava and Sam. Leave. Leave now. You're neither attractive, interesting or provocative. And, you're portrayed by bad, seriously bad, actors, including ...
THE. WORST. ACTRESS. EVAH. IN. EASTENDERS.
Both characters are uninteresting and ridiculous, skittering about Walford, having clandestine sex because The Magic Negro is too afraid of her spoiled, half-Klingon son to face up to what she wants.
Another fine bit of bad continuity was the scene in the pub where Ava was sat in the booth next to the booth where Bianca was sitting. Considering the closeness which developed between the two women during Liam's gangabanga, it was weird how neither woman acknowledged the other, almost as if they were strangers.
Ava, Sam and Dex-TAAAAAAAA, otherwise known as Newman's Negroes ... epic failures.
Max in Mourning.
Max looks like a sad gecko. Kirsty looks like her hair could do with a wash. She misses Max, Max misses Tanya. Same old same old.
Carey Andrews: Purveyor of Sucked Shit. Some watchable sucked shit, but sucked shit all the same.
SECOND. WORST. ACTRESS. EVER. IN. EASTENDERS.
I know TPTB are pushing Jossa as the go-to girl and ingenue of the moment. I know when she returns to the screen sporting a Mexican tan and highlights in her hair, we'll be asked to root for and be sympathetic to poor, misguided Lauren; but the truth is, she's the most unlikeable, immature and entitled person on the show, and I can't see a thirtysomething like Lomas's Stone is supposed to be falling for a nineteen year-old lazy, rude, entitled little bitch.
It's obvious TPTB are channelling Tiffany Raymond maturing from material girl into sweetness personified, who had to endure Grant Mitchell as a husband, before tragically meeting her end; but Lauren isn't Tiffany. She isn't anywhere near to Tiffany.
I would have tagged Lomas as Roxy's squeeze after being dumped by Alfie, but it looks as though Roxy's also being sacrificed at the altar of the Branning non-virgin.
The only good things that will come of this will be (a) that Peter Beale won't be romantically linked with Lauren yet again. That could be good, and that could be bad. He could become an item with Lola, which may work to Lola's ultimate good; or he could be paired again with the
The other good thing is that this, surely, will mean the departure of Walford's resident Mouth-Breather-In-Chief ...
Such a shame Lauren can't leave as well.
Onward to tonight's fare ...
Two Village Idiots and a Bitter Bitch.
EastEnders definitely has a recurrent theme of man-hating, making men appear weak, gormless and ineffectual.
The four main male characters in the show at the moment are (or should be) Phil Mitchell, Ian Beale, Alfie Moon and Max Branning. They should be the principal male leads - not perfect, genuinely flawed, but veering towards the positive. Instead, especially since the Kirkwood era, the writing for three of them (Phil, Alfie and Ian) has been abysmal, and Max has been turned into a cartoon.
They've not just been presented as tragically flawed, they've been presented as pejorative beings. Phil's a wanton thug and a villain (something he's never been). Alfie is a doormat (not even conceivable in his previous stint). Ian has got to be co-dependent on some female who's sleeping with him to the point that he's bullied by his atrocious daughter (Ian Beale has lost his acerbidity). And Max cannot love whatever woman he's with until this symptom turns out to be a sad joke.
The whole brouhaha, which resulted in Ian's latest business venture going up in smoke came about via the absolute stupidest of misunderstandings. So stupid that it's reflected in the even more innate stupidity of the witnesses to the occurrence.
I'm Team Ian on this all the way.
Jean is a blithering village idiot, an annoying screeching bag of hot air, New Age philosophy and precious little common sense. And dumb as fuck. In fact, she's so damned dumb, she makes Heather (who got a mention from Shirley as she wallowed in self-pity) look like Einstein.
Anyone present earlier in the day (read: the last episode), when Jean produced the perfect souffle', would know that Ian wasn't sexually harassing Jean in the least. He was pleased, suprised and grateful that her attempt had turned out so well. He was kissing her, on the cheek, with delight at her effort.
Is Ian a demanding boss? Yes, but being a sous-chef is a demanding job, as Ian should have realised when he offered this position to Jean and something she should have realised as well when she took it.
Jean totally overreacted to Ian's behaviour, based entirely on that shitty horoscope, which she believed, word for word, and on Ian's "little treat" of giving her a glass of wine.
In fact, Jean's overreaction is precisely the way a lot of sexual harassment cases begin - in total innocence on the man's part.
What was either stupid or low or both, were Poopy-La-Dim's and Shitney's interpretations of what happened. As I said, anyone with a modicum of common sense could see the context in which Ian kissed Jean. Poopy, as we know, has her shallow-brained head entrenched so far up her skinny arse, that she would interpret this situation differently. At the moment, she's caught up in her ego and image as a part of nouveau management in her own little empire, and I imagine sweet Poopy is something of a passive-aggressive little bitch in her own right.
As for Whitney, she's clued up enough to know exactly what Ian was about in his approach to Jean, and her reaction was simply malicious - as were her rude comments about Ian being a "perv." Ian, whether she cares to admit it or not, is family, and he's actually giving her a second chance and an opportunity to save for her wedding by giving her this job. The old Ian Beale wouldn't have had her within throwing distance of his restaurant.
Even worse that all that, was Denise's reaction, believing the bevy of Jean, Poopy-La-Dim and Whitney over Ian, himself. Ian is still fragile emotionally and psychologically, and to treat him the way she did, even suggesting that they split, is sheer stupidity.
Arguably the best scene of the evening came between Ian and Denise back at the B and B, when he was explaining to her how he came to value success - with plenty of good continuity and past reference. It's true that Pete Beale was less than ambitious. His life's plan never extended past running the family fruit and veg stall and, as Ian described, putting in the hours and then putting your feet up. It's also true that Pete thought catering an effeminate profession, and - in a coincidental reference to what became the first instance in which Julia's Theme was used - how he used to seek solace from his grandmother Lou Beale. This was one of the first times, if not the first, where Ian Beale totally explained how he became fixated on money and financial success - as a means of proving his father wrong.
Another aspect of the new and improving Ian Beale, is admitting that he is actually punching above his weight with Denise and admitting that he was always worried that his relationship with her would end, sooner rather than later, even grimly accepting what he thought was the end of his romance with Denise. Adam Woodyatt stepped up to the plate tonight.
Meanwhile, back at the Bitch Ranch, Jean's solution to her so-called "sexual harassment" is to de-camp to the Vic and drink an assortment of colourful cocktails, in the company of Shirley and Bianca.
Shirley makes minimum wage working in the Minute Mart and pays a sixty-quid-a-night room in the B and B, quickly becoming the local dosshouse.; Bianca is terminally poor, working on a tat stall for a pittance to keep her puling brats in chicken nuggets. So both of them are seen propping up the bar in the Vic, as you do, listening to Jean, bolstered by Whitney, witter on and on about Ian's behaviour, linked inextricably to her horoscope from the previous day.
Here's an observation: Tuesday's episode centred on the lunchtime fare at Scarlett's, and the souffle' was for Carl's lunch. Now all of a sudden, in this episode, it's evening time, and Carl's got the souffle for his dinner. So the entire action in today's episode takes place in the evening of the same day as Tuesday's episode.
As I said, time and drunkenness pass quickly in Walford. Go figure.
Since Jean insists on showing Shirley and Bianca her latest horoscope, which is in her bag back at the restaurant, tanked up, they re-enter the empty restaurant to search for the bag, first lighting a plethora of candles and eventually finding a bottle of wine to drink. As you do.
This is another rank stupidity. Shirley is a fiftysomething grandmother, who's bitter, twisted and with enough of misplaced entitlement to vandalise someone's hard-earned establishment, taking whatever isn't nailed down. Even more stupid, is Bianca. She's illegally entered a closed establishment and helped herself to goods without paying for them. That's stealing, and that means, if Ian were to return, she could be arrested and summarily sent back to prison. Once again, you'd think she would have known better.
Instead, they sit about, drinking Ian's wine and trash-talking Ian, with Bianca taking the high moral road of telling about Ian paying for prostitutes, and bitchily remarking about Janine having been a prostitute. Er, really, Bianca? What about your grandmother Pat? Or even Whitney? And even though she didn't actually charge money for it, Bianca certainly put it about a bit, as well as being guilty of GBH and theft.
The discovery of Ian's special bottle of whiskey also becomes Shirley's bitter soliloquy about her real dislike of Ian Beale - the fact that he knew what Ben did and then did nothing. Once again ... really, Shirley? It's so totally unjust that, a year after Ian's monumental breakdown, he's got this trophy restaurant, whilst she's stuck in one room in a doss house.
Even the putridly retarded Bianca is in agreement that Ian doesn't deserve his success, not that she's above working hard for such a goal. Nope, things have to be handed to Bianca.
So Shirley now includes Ian in her blame game for Heather's death. Ian said nothing about Ben's involvement, unbeknownst to Shirley, because he was being horrifically bullied by Phil into keeping schtum about Ben's involvement. And Shirley really should look in the mirror, because she betrayed Heather also, by not revealing Phil's involvement in Heather's murder. Phil's free, and he's ended his relationship with Shirley. Ian's worked to overcome his problems of the last year; Shirley had the opportunity to build a new life with her daughter and grandson and chose to return to live in a sordid doss house and work at a dead-end job ... and this is Ian's fault? For this, Ian deserves to be robbed and vandalised?
Jean acquiescing to Shirley's convoluted, drunken and self-pitying rationale was bad, the fact that, after the fire had started, the damaged enhanced by the sprinkler system starting, all three of the women left, screeching and laughing; and a drunken Kim spotted the water damage and simply shrugged and walked on.
These women suck. Truly, and I wouldn't blink if all four of them were shown the door. Vile bitches. And stupid.
The Prince of Darkness in Waiting.
Personally, Janine's and Michael's mind games are beginning to get a bit boring. This is a major problem of EastEnders. They latch onto an aspect of a story and ... lather, rinse, repeat. Again and again and again. Ad infinitum.
I think we're in for much of the same with Michael and Janine. In fact, so confusing is this harebrained action that no one is sure who's being played. On the face of it, Michael expects his instructions to Janine not to return to Walford, would be taken as an open invitation to return. That's too easy to anticipate.
On the face of it, again, it seems Janine has snaked an admission from Michael, taped illicitly, that he wants her back in Walford because she's the mother of his child. So the entire hiring-firing-hiring facade with Billy was a ruse, and Billy Mitchell - Billy Mitchell - has one-upped Michael Moon.
Yes, so the question in this instance is, who's zooming whom? We'll never know, and by the end of the storyline, I suppose we'll be thoroughly bored with it.
Interesting scenes, however, between Michael and Jack Branning tonight, as Jack did a bit of midnight cleaning in his flat. Jack Branning actually admitted to being a crap parent, calling himself a weekend parent. He's not even that. It's been a couple of years since he's seen Penny, and he hasn't seen Richard since he was born, although the mention of the one child who did count, James, was notable foreshadowing that James's mother is returning imminently.
Even more prescient was Michael's remarks about a father being around for the child's birth, then assing off for eighteen years, leaving the mother with the hard work, and deeming the mother of said child a "horrible mother."
This wasn't just a reference to Janine. Michael has serious, very serious mother issues. I fear his leaving line will have much to do with this, but it won't be suicide - at least, not intentionally.
The Most Pointless Characters in the Show.
Ava and Sam. Leave. Leave now. You're neither attractive, interesting or provocative. And, you're portrayed by bad, seriously bad, actors, including ...
THE. WORST. ACTRESS. EVAH. IN. EASTENDERS.
Another fine bit of bad continuity was the scene in the pub where Ava was sat in the booth next to the booth where Bianca was sitting. Considering the closeness which developed between the two women during Liam's gangabanga, it was weird how neither woman acknowledged the other, almost as if they were strangers.
Ava, Sam and Dex-TAAAAAAAA, otherwise known as Newman's Negroes ... epic failures.
Max in Mourning.
Max looks like a sad gecko. Kirsty looks like her hair could do with a wash. She misses Max, Max misses Tanya. Same old same old.
Carey Andrews: Purveyor of Sucked Shit. Some watchable sucked shit, but sucked shit all the same.
Its happened again ! I just about finished my comment and scroll up to check a detail in the main review & those orange left & right tabs appear & without touching them they auto reload the page in Chrome for android mobile once you finish the scroll, & you can't retrieve the post ! Aaahhhh.
ReplyDeleteSo my review is lost in cyberspace but I will try to remember some of it.
Carl the supposed hard man - accepts a pudding in exchange for his £500 that Ian palms him off with because "I don't have your £500 so I can't give you what the restaurant hasn't taken any business"
Carl "ok then I'll have a Soufflé"
Yeah right - another hole in the EastEnders introduces a hard man & forgets his role.
Yes Ian was the wrongly accused but he had it coming for being an ass.
Jeans bag: Really ? Assuming that she puts her belongings in a safe 'staff only' area & not just park it in the customers dining zone, why on earth would she not be able to find it in a tiny little restaurant ? But hey - this is Jean :--)