Yes, don't we?
There's just one thing about secrets ... they keep getting found out.
On with the show ...
Yet another seriously good episode, and I do mean seriously good ... It had drama, it had suprises, it had pathos.
So why don't I give a rat's arse about the characters it featured? Is it because there were some obvious retcons creeping out of the woodwork tonight? Is it because some real history of the programme, sealed in stone, was broken apart to serve a storyline's purpose? Was it because, to me, a long-term viewer, it was obvious that the writer in question is writing certain characters and certain circumstances all wrong?
Or is it simply because most of the people featured tonight were deeply unpleasant people, especially two, who were caught up in scenes contrived to curry sympathy in their favour?
Think critically. It is very possible to find a drama watchable and interesting, without liking the ratbags it features, except that if I liked said ratbags and empathised with some of them, it would make the drama damned near perfect.
I guess the theme of the episode tonight had to be the prodigal sons - two of whom came home and one pulled a fast one.
The Messiah Breaks His Promise.
Yes, he is a very naughty boy, for not living up to the promise he made, via Twitter, to scores of long-term viewers, who looked to an Executive Producer who went on record in 2010 saying that Sharon was his favourite character, to salvage the brutal destruction of her character effected by his two predecessors and Simon Ashdown.
But we now know that either he has no intention of redeeming an iconic character, one of two remaining original characters, because he's too interested in promoting the publicity of those whom he created - one in particular, who's anything but redemptive or likeable.
With Sharon, EastEnders has been the first British soap to take a much-loved and established character and drag her reputation and characterisation through the mud.
Can you ever imagine Coronation Street getting Suranne Jones or Sarah Lancashire back and then rubbishing Karen McDonald or Raquel?
No, nor can I.
Dominic Treadwell-Collins, explain yourself.
Let me get the real downside out of the way before I comment on the rest of the episode, and that was Sharon. I'm almost wishing for Sharon to leave the show, and it isn't because I dislike her. If anything, I'm disappointed at having been conned by this EP, who went on record in an interview on the old WW, to say that Sharon was his favourite character of all time. Well, if that's the case, I'd hate to see how he treats characters he hates.
I'm sorry, but this is beginning to look and smell like a con. It's May now, and we still haven't seen Sharon brought back to what he spuriously described as the "Sharon of old". We've seen her bar just once. When she appears, it's usually in some minor sequence with the odd line or two, and she's always upstaged by Shirley, Queen of Scrotes. But more than that, the writing for her, once again, is all wrong.
And the writing for Phil is all wrong. This is Sharon, whose history with the Mitchells goes back for more than 20 years. Phil is supposed to love this woman, yet he continuously gravitates toward a bitter, venomous, stinking, fag-breathed old hag, who abandoned her children and tried to kill her sibling. Tonight we had Ritchie Scott being blatantly rude in blanking Sharon and Phil keeping Ben's release secret from her. Not only that, but Neanderthal-browed Jay actually expected Sharon to possess some sort of radar that would hone in on the fact that Ben is out.
She had a good night at a bar which Phil has financed, she didn't know the Crown Prince of Scrotes was released from prison, and she returns home in a good mood to be castigated. Even more than that, the writer - Colin Wyatt, an experienced writer who should have known better - made her reaction to Ben's release and Phil's despair shallow and superficial.
This is f*cking Sharon, who knows a thing or two about rejection and deception, having her old man disappear from her life for fourteen years, and in that interim, finding her birth mother and being rejected by her. I hope she's seriously screwing Phil out of money, but more than that, I hope Grant pays a visit long enough for her to leave with him, whilst flipping the stiff middle finger in Phil's direction.
Once again, this is Sharon, who always, only and ever got the better of the Mitchells. This is Sharon, who is the only woman to walk away from either brother a better person, a stronger person and with her dignity intact. Any writer, and any producer who's thinking of portraying one of the two remaining original and very iconic characters in the show in such a second-rate manner should be taken out and smacked. Not once, but again and again.
No matter how much he bleats on blissfully about how iconic Shirley, Queen of Scrotes is (and she's not), Treadwell-Collins knows that Shirley will never be Sharon, nor will she ever be as important to the show's history as Sharon is.
Prodigal Son I: Peter the Prat.
Peter and Lauren are two pretty people who look good together and are about as collectively shallow as the puddle in the pavement in the middle of Bridge Street. Pretty Peter is a classist snob, and suddenly the self-obsessed, selfish and entitled recovering alcoholic has acquired wisdom beyond her years, encouraging Peter to connect with his father - yeah, sure, like she connected with hers, when she took the wheel of a car and tried to run him over.
I almost gagged a maggot when Lauren said she and Peter didn't really "do" anything by their kiss. Sorry, toots, but you're yet again, the other woman, just like your mother. Peter is in a relationship with Lola, a relationship which he initiated and he pursued. He led Lola to believe he loved her, he even moved in with her; so now, he's cheating on her, and the snipey little toerag has the gall to text her a message after "connecting" with Daddeee to apologise. For what? Maybe he should apologise to poor Lola for being a first-rate cad, a liar and a deceitful toerag in the bargain.
And using the death of his sister to mask and excuse his bad behaviour.
And speaking of his sister, the Lucy Ian and Peter reminsced about tonight was nothing like the Lucy the viewers saw on screen, be she Suffield or Bywater. Remember the good times Ian had with Lucy?
Let's see ... how about the time she brought Steven back into their lives, only to have him kidnap Ian and injure Jane so badly she had to have a hysterectome? Remember Lucy ordering Ian to fling the gun Steven used into the canal and lying to the police about some unidentified mugger at the abandoned flat shooting Jane? That was a real hoot. We had such a good time!
Or how about the time Ian hired Craig at the chippie and fourteen year-old Lucy took a shine to him? She concealed the fact he'd mugged Patrick Trueman in his shop? That was a real corker! Wasn't it a riot that Denise's daughter and Kevin Wicks's son had an axe to grind with Sean Slater and unwittingly helped Lucy out by blaming him for Patrick's mugging. Peter and Ian should be rolling on the floor at the memory of that good time. Why, they should walk across the Square to the Vic and have a drink with Dean. He can have them in stitches, telling them about his time in prison.
Then, there was the time Lucy brought Ollie the tree-hugger home and threatened to have sex with him? She moved out to Christian's, but even he couldn't handle her.
Or how about that time she threw an impromptu party when Ian and Jane were out and trashed the house entirely. She didn't like the way Ian spoke to her so she smacked him across the face, and he - quite rightly - smacked her back. And then apologised. That was a bellyacher, that one.
Or, hey, remember the time she had the abortion and they all lied to Jane and said it was a miscarriage? Couldn't stop laughing for weeks.
Or the funniest ... when Ian told Mel and had her believing for months that Lucy had cancer just so Mel wouldn't leave Ian. Do you think Peter remembers that one, amongst all the studio posed pictures of the Beale empire adorning the walls of his newest enterprise. Who the hell wants to eat jumped-up junk food in a restaurant that does nothing but brag on the perceived greatness of the family who founded it.
I'm as bored by Ian Beale owning the majority of eateries in the confines of Albert Square as I am by the rivers of tears he's shed in every episode in which he's appeared, because this is beginning to look less like he's mourning his daughter and more like he's pitying himself for losing "everything" - "everything" being that maternally interfering dominatrix Jane. Crying is Woodyatt's party piece. We get it. But there's such a thing as overkill.
And nice to know that Peter had been informed by "the help" that Phil had spoken to Ian.
Prodigal Son II: Ben the Sociopath.
Ben is out there in London someplace, at a halfway house, the whereabouts of which Phil is not entitled to know, and that's a decision Ben's made because Ben is now an adult. I laughed when Phil remarked that the staff at the house were glad to see the back of Ben.
The big surprise for me in this episode is that Ben's not only been in contact with Jay, he's actually met with him. Now Jay is treading dangerous ground here, especially if Phil finds out this deception. Jay's life simply won't be worth living. And as much as respecting the confidences of a friend is important, Phil's given Jay a roof over his head and he employs him. Phil's desperate to rebuild a relationship with his son, even recognising that he pushed his son adversely the way Eric Mitchell pushed him, and still Jay sits there, watching him suffer, bold as brass and says nothing. Jay lost his father in a senseless act of violence. He should have more compassion for Phil's predicament and speak up.
Entwined in this is poor Lola, who's rejected by Peter, and Abi, who now realises she's being subtly binned by Jay. Jay can be a hard-arsed little prat, paying lip service to Abi's academic ambitions, yet not wanting her to achieve her dream at all. He is controlling and immature and was just as pig-headed in his own attitude to Abi as Peter was to Lola.
But wait a moment ... I thought we were getting away from this teenaged angst element in EastEnders. What was the remark? About parents no longer being seen through the eyes of their children? Or was that a con as well? At any rate, Abi was the gooseberry tonight, and she realised it. But Phil was infuriating as well, being put out that he'd been out trying to find Ben, and the three kids had been sitting there doing ... well, doing nothing.
Prodigal Son III: Dean the Mean.
Dean is back, and this is a more successful return than Stacey's, in my opinion. I like Matt di Angelo, and I think he served himself well, professionally, in being away from the show. He's matured, and that shows in his vocal range and his delivery.
A down point before getting to the praise - retconning. In 2007, it was established that Shirley had abandoned Dean when he was a baby. Dean was a baby, Carly was three and Jimbo was six. When Shirley returned to their lives in 2007, neither Dean nor Carly even recognised Shirley, yet now it's established that Mick and Linda had seen Dean when he was five years old. Shirley had been long-gone from his life by then, and I find it hard to believe, although maybe plausible, that Kevin would have retained close contact with Shirley's family after her desertion.
The sum total of Shirley's arrogance and self-absorption was revealed in that she expected her son to be returning to Mummy Dearest. Instead of bounding for him with an embrace, she offered to buy him a drink. Well, she is an alcoholic, even if TPTB refuse to acknowledge that fact. Almost as hard to bear was Mick pushing the mother-and-child reunion, without knowing or taking into consideration that Dean had every right to be well-annoyed with his mother. He was the one child who reached out to her during his last stint in the Square, and she failed him miserably, preferring to feck about with a Polish builder rather than spend time with her son.
But a great deal of this storyline was intended to drum up the sympathy vote for the Queen of the Scrotes. Poor, pitiful Shirley running upstairs to boo-hoo because Sonny Jim was blanking her. She gets all the sympathy from Bubba Mick, who thinks the sun shines out of her behind. She's even reeled in Linda, FGS. She knows she's done wrong, because she then runs outside to the alleyway to sulk.
I just wish they'd go ahead and put Phil with Shirley. They're obviously now going to bond over their filial predicaments, and somewhere along the line, some sort of pathetic comment will be made about Heather being too good for this world and Ben having done her a favour in braining her. You watch.
Dean's home truths about Shirley were pretty accurate, save for her abandonment of him whilst he was in prison. To her credit, she did try to see him, but she did abandon Jimbo, who was disabled, she did walk away from him and Carly, she did lie to them about their father and she certainly did stitch Kevin up badly. It was heartening to hear Dean speak so about hisfather. However, Dean is Shirley's son, and that is an unbreakable bond, and no matter what my son had said to me, I'd certainly have something to say to my brother who raised a hand to strike my child. Mick was out of order.
Star of the show, however, was Stan. Timothy West, CBE, is doing a masterclass in acting, assisted from time to time by one Miss Ann Mitchell. Stan wants his family back together. This is his swansong and his opportunity to right the wrongs of the past. He knows that Shirley has done bad and vile things the way he has, and that's what bites the tits of the Queen of Scrotes - that she's like her old man in every way. Stan lied to Dean to bring him back into the fold and make things good with his mother, and Queen Shirley is blaming him for Dean's telling the world what a crap woman and sleazy human being she is. That's not Stan's fault. That's Shirley's. And as much hatred and venom she throws her father's way, and he lies to save her face. And yet she can't understand the hatred and venom coming from Dean.
I don't want Dean to reconcile with Shirley. She doesn't deserve any retribution because she's such a vile creature until we know the reasons behind her abandonment of her children and why she treated Kevin the way she did. I still remember her drunken cry at Denise when Kevin died - that she loved him first and she loved him best. That was certainly some love she gave him.
Great episode. Shame the characters annoyed me.
No comments:
Post a Comment