I watched this episode again this morning, as it was late last night when I originally watched it, and I wanted a second perspective of it.
Whilst a very good episode, carried by Kellie Bright's flawless and near-wordless performance, it was less than perfect in a couple of respects, so I'm going to get the bad things out of the way first.
A Load of Old (Tina and) Tosh. Arguably, the most boring and unlikeable duo on the programme. If DTC has failed with any of the Carters, it's with Tina. I could care less about their quest for babydom and the issue Tina has with not wanting to be a parent, yet not wanting to lose Tosh. Either one would be an abysmal parent.
The more I'm seeing of Tosh, the more I'm not liking her at all. The aggressive tone of language, the chin thrust stubbornly forward, the snide remarks are all too unpleasant to watch. This is someone who's self-appointed herself as a moral arbiter, and yet she's shrugging off using the sperm of her partner's nephew as nothing - which, really, it is. Tina's treating it as infidelity, which is also a joke, considering the number of times Tina's found her tongue down Sonia's throat, whilst still with Tosh. The whole IVF lark is boring. Many couples who use surrogacy as a means of having a child use a family member as the birth mother; in this instance, Tosh has used a family member to provide sperm for her pregnancy. As she pointed out to Tina, the child would then be related to Tina as well.
It's such a big load of shite, it's not even worth a storyline, in and of itself.
As much as Tosh's attitude annoys me, Tina's grates on me as well - the constant little girl-like mincing and her sullen face in a child-like, over-exaggerated example of displeasure looks imminently slappable.
Listen ... Tina's been here a year. She hasn't worked. Send her to the salt mines, and send Tosh with her.
The Official Offensive Racial Stereotype. I shudder to use his name, but there is is, back again and in our faces, and I abhor the fact that he's about to become romantically involved with Nancy Carter ... again.
Yes, yes, yes ... I know he's won not one, but two gongs, but his attitude, his off-screen near-as-dammit criminality and his general unpopularity scream for his contract not to be renewed. Yet, there he was, tonight, motormouth to the limit, even attempting a pisspoor bit of humour and revealing his stupidity ("compare" and "compere?"), not to mention his crass tactlessness, wondering if he could cadge a pay rise from Phil from Phil's hospital bed now that he was the only bod holding down the Arches. Er ... Jay, anyone? I wish someone would ensure he "cadged" the next train to Newcastle so he could troll the streets with his putrid mother.
And now for the good, if not disturbing bits.
The Carters, in General, but particularly Linda. No doubt about it, Kellie Bright owned that episode, and with a minimal amount of dialogue. Her lined and tortured face conveyed the fact that she was emotionally stricken to the point of being mute with shock, because she still was in shock at the previous day's events. What totally amazed me, however, was the abject misreading that something was tremendously wrong with Linda from her nearest and dearest.
It's been established that Linda likes a drink, so the people who live with her must be familiar with her behaviour during a hangover. This was not a hangover. Mick should have realised that, the moment he awoke, at 7:10 AM, to Linda sitting by the side of his bed. You want to hug the bed during a hangover, yet Mick assumes this is what is wrong with her by virtue of the fact that she's wearing his hoodie, when he's fully awake. That and her paleness.
That's an easy enough assumption to make, considering Mick's sole concern of the moment is the whereabouts of Shirley. That was the absolute amazing aspect of this episode, that Shirley - sight unseen - is still being depicted as the victim of this entire charade, when she's anything but. In truth, she's actually the mug of the piece, considering she was facile enough to run away on Babe's word about Phil being poorly and the police looking for her. One wonders why Babe wanted her out of the way, because she obviously did?
Still, there you have it - Mick obsessing about her "out there, all alone, scared, while we've got each other" (all those phrases were used to expound upon poor, pitiful Shirl's plight, even the habitual excuse of Shirley maintaining a hard front to mask the fact that she's scared.
Oh, My Lord, I didn't mean to torch Ian Beale's restaurant. You see, I was scared. I didn't mean to shoot Phil Mitchell, I was scared.
Actually, how would Mick know that at all, considering the fact that, before last Christmas, he'd not clapped eyes on Shirley for fourteen years? Did she leave her children out of fear? If so, why hasn't that been addressed? Shirley has never impressed me as someone who's fearful or frightened, but rather someone who's impulsive, who has the emotional development of a spoiled adolescent, who's selfish and obsessive, and who isn't above blaming other people or circumstances for her own poor judgement.
Unseen, she dominated the background of the episode from start to finish, even with the Carter "children," and I'm using that term in its fullest context, because the Carter kids do act years younger than they are. They need more than superficial interaction with other people in the Square. Lee is involved with Whitney, but has no other male friends his own age. Johnny has no friends, nor does Nancy, who seldom interacts outside the dynamic. TORS (The Offensive Racial Stereotype - I refuse to use the name of a character who should be long gone based on innate unpopularity) was forbidden to speculate as to whether Phil would give him a pay rise, not because that was in bad taste all around but because ... Oi, that's my auntie you're talking about ... Earlier, Johnny was forbidden by Lee to sympathise with Sharon's plight (Sharon was the one who gave him a job, remember?), when Lee reminded him that Shirley was his aunt. Does that mean that Lee condones Shirley's obvious intention on breaking Sharon and Phil up, that he condones what she did at the wedding breakfast, an event to which she was not invited and should never have been brought by Mick?
At least, Mick prefaced his fact-finding mission to Sharon by saying he didn't condone what Shirley had done, but more of that below.
What happened to Linda was appalling. It was bad enough she had to confront aspects of the rape still extant in her home, many being innocently emphasised by her family - the breakfast group around the table, upon which sat the vase of wedding flowers, which were later thoughtfully (and thoughtlessly) brought into her bedroom by Johnny, and the lunch, again, around the kitchen table, to which Dean suddenly showed up - the kitchen, with Dean, being too much for Linda to harbour.
Anyone with any modicum of common sense could have sussed that Linda wasn't suffering from a hangover, but that something was bothering her. She almost seemed on the point of telling Babe, when Babe showed up and appeared to be concerned about the way Linda looked - "done in", was the way she put it. For one split second, as Linda opened her mouth, you got the impression that she wanted to tell Babe, but couldn't find the words.
However, I noticed two things about this storyline that will impact on its outcome and reveal in the future. The first thing Linda did after her encounter with Dean was take a shower. However, Lee noticed her dress on the bathroom floor, which she rushed to pick up and thrust into the back of her wardrobe. That's crucial, especially if Dean denies the encounter. There should be enough of Dean's DNA, in the form of seminal fluid, on that dress to prove that he had sex with her, and also, Dean's story to Mick of finding "someone" who took his mind off Shirley - the person with whom he used to work leaving The Albert the night before. Mick was surprised the pub was open. All anyone need do is question Sharon to expose the lie. The hard part is convincing various people that a rape occurred, and the longer Linda leaves this, the more difficult the circumstances will prove.
As for Dean's reaction throughout this episode, I was baffled at first. Initially, in the first scene with Tina and Tosh, and later in the salon, I thought he was thinking, possibly in worry and horror, about what he'd done; yet the moment he found out from Mick that Linda had said nothing, he genuinely took that as tacit compliance, and evidence in his warped mind, that Linda had accepted the encounter as consensual, hence the creepy text message and his licence to show up at lunch.
Oddly, throughout this entire Carter inter-exploratory segment of the episode, I thought the weakest link was Danny Dyer. The conversation between him and Dean was contrived, especially with the "Uncle Mick" remark and the obviously foreshadowing line about Shirley ~ And she isn't even my mother.~
Throughout the episode in general, and in the scene with Steve McFadden, Dyer seemed to be winding back and presenting himself as a bad impersonation of Danny Dyer in a gangsta film, rather than Mick Carter, seeking information about his sister-mother.
The Mitchells Old and New. I loved the Ronnie-Sharon interaction. In fact, this episode, more than any, showed Sharon as she was originally, pre-John Yorke's tragedy queen. Sharon didn't behave badly. This was Sharon at the height of her Mitchelldom Mach I in the 90s, and Ronnie would do well not to underestimate her. One thing subtly emphasised the return of Sharon of old, in the hospital, in her blood-stained gown, with Phil, when he apologised. Sharon, smiling, told him they'd talk about what happened when he was stronger, meaning he wasn't off the hook yet about having slept with Shirley and cheated on her.
The Mitchells amaze me at their hypocrisy and their propensity to sell weaker family members down river at the expense of saving their own individual hides. Peggy was quite ready to shop Sam as a suspect in Archie's murder to keep the bizzies away from her or Phil. When Heather was killed, Phil was ready to see Billy arrested and charged. Tonight, it was Ronnie's turn.
It came out early that Ronnie was only interested in getting totally rid of that gun to protect herself. She knew, Phil knew and Sharon knew that the gun originated with Ronnie, and that eventually its ownership would be traced back to her. You can bet your bottom dollar as well, that if Ben had got caught ditching that gun, she'd have been on the next plane out, never to be seen again. At Phil's hospital bed, she as good as admitted, the only way for her to safeguard her existence and to keep her unborn child was to risk sacrifice of another Mitchell, getting rid of the gun.
At the same time, I can understand Sharon's consternation at Phil not wanting to daub Shirley up, thinking she doesn't deserve imprisonment for this. This is the woman who's gleefully strutted around Walford, making dirty sexual innuendo about Sharon, waiting happily to see her publically humiliated, and Phil doesn't want to see her punished? The entire reason Sharon had the gun was down to Phil's actions, and Phil allowing himself to be duped, yet again, by Ronnie in hiding her incriminating evidence.
The Ronnie-Sharon scenes were the best of the episode, I thought. Once again, this was Sharon of old, not to be cowed and patronised by any Mitchell, least of all a retconned one. She gave Ronnie as good as Ronnie gave her, and Ronnie would do well not to underestimate Sharon. Sharon is the daughter of Den Watts and survived Grant Mitchell. As hypocritical as she is, herself - and Sharon is - she does have a moral compass, and I do believe she was so angry that for one moment, she allowed herself the fantasy of grassing Shirley up and taking the whole shabang down with her. And add to that the fact that Sharon, like Peggy, still isn't over the loss of the Vic. Scratch the surface and that's where Sharon's real heart lies. The line about Shirley not being punished but still being in the Vic, lording it over Walford, undeserved, rang especially true. And even though Sharon might hate lying to the police, it's something she's done before. If Ronnie Retcon knows anything about the family history, she'd know that Sharon compromised her best friend, who was shot by a psycho mate of Grant's, into lying about her injury to keep the police away from Sharon and the Mitchells. Ronnie's murder of Carl, also, isn't the first murder for which Sharon's covered - Dennis and Jack Dalton? And Sharon and Phil left Walford in 2006 with Sharon's tacit instructions to Phil to off Jonnie Allen, so she's as much a hard nut, when it comes to it, as Ronnie. Whatever she tells the policemen by Phil's bedside, she'll land Shirley in it in or lie about an unknown shooter in such a way that Madame Queen of Scrotes will be able to return, unscathed, to the Square by the end of November, surely (pun intended).
As for Sharon's confrontation with Mick, that was pretty much on par with Mitchell behaviour as well. Mick may have been genuinely concerned about Phil and Sharon - and moreso about what they planned to do, now that Shirley had shot Phil; but that was the main pupose behind his visit, to gauge Phil's condition and to suss what they planned on doing - whether or not it was safe for Shirley to return. It was the same with his visit to Phil, where Phil denied knowing where Shirley'd got the gun, and there again ... Linda knows. Linda knows about Sharon and the gun, albeit she knows only that Sharon found the gun in Phil's kitchen.
At the end of the day, no one will out Shirley because too many people have too much to lose, including Denny, who now wants to be a Mitchell. After all, Dennis Rickman is dead, isn't he?
Whilst a very good episode, carried by Kellie Bright's flawless and near-wordless performance, it was less than perfect in a couple of respects, so I'm going to get the bad things out of the way first.
A Load of Old (Tina and) Tosh. Arguably, the most boring and unlikeable duo on the programme. If DTC has failed with any of the Carters, it's with Tina. I could care less about their quest for babydom and the issue Tina has with not wanting to be a parent, yet not wanting to lose Tosh. Either one would be an abysmal parent.
The more I'm seeing of Tosh, the more I'm not liking her at all. The aggressive tone of language, the chin thrust stubbornly forward, the snide remarks are all too unpleasant to watch. This is someone who's self-appointed herself as a moral arbiter, and yet she's shrugging off using the sperm of her partner's nephew as nothing - which, really, it is. Tina's treating it as infidelity, which is also a joke, considering the number of times Tina's found her tongue down Sonia's throat, whilst still with Tosh. The whole IVF lark is boring. Many couples who use surrogacy as a means of having a child use a family member as the birth mother; in this instance, Tosh has used a family member to provide sperm for her pregnancy. As she pointed out to Tina, the child would then be related to Tina as well.
It's such a big load of shite, it's not even worth a storyline, in and of itself.
As much as Tosh's attitude annoys me, Tina's grates on me as well - the constant little girl-like mincing and her sullen face in a child-like, over-exaggerated example of displeasure looks imminently slappable.
Listen ... Tina's been here a year. She hasn't worked. Send her to the salt mines, and send Tosh with her.
The Official Offensive Racial Stereotype. I shudder to use his name, but there is is, back again and in our faces, and I abhor the fact that he's about to become romantically involved with Nancy Carter ... again.
Yes, yes, yes ... I know he's won not one, but two gongs, but his attitude, his off-screen near-as-dammit criminality and his general unpopularity scream for his contract not to be renewed. Yet, there he was, tonight, motormouth to the limit, even attempting a pisspoor bit of humour and revealing his stupidity ("compare" and "compere?"), not to mention his crass tactlessness, wondering if he could cadge a pay rise from Phil from Phil's hospital bed now that he was the only bod holding down the Arches. Er ... Jay, anyone? I wish someone would ensure he "cadged" the next train to Newcastle so he could troll the streets with his putrid mother.
And now for the good, if not disturbing bits.
The Carters, in General, but particularly Linda. No doubt about it, Kellie Bright owned that episode, and with a minimal amount of dialogue. Her lined and tortured face conveyed the fact that she was emotionally stricken to the point of being mute with shock, because she still was in shock at the previous day's events. What totally amazed me, however, was the abject misreading that something was tremendously wrong with Linda from her nearest and dearest.
It's been established that Linda likes a drink, so the people who live with her must be familiar with her behaviour during a hangover. This was not a hangover. Mick should have realised that, the moment he awoke, at 7:10 AM, to Linda sitting by the side of his bed. You want to hug the bed during a hangover, yet Mick assumes this is what is wrong with her by virtue of the fact that she's wearing his hoodie, when he's fully awake. That and her paleness.
That's an easy enough assumption to make, considering Mick's sole concern of the moment is the whereabouts of Shirley. That was the absolute amazing aspect of this episode, that Shirley - sight unseen - is still being depicted as the victim of this entire charade, when she's anything but. In truth, she's actually the mug of the piece, considering she was facile enough to run away on Babe's word about Phil being poorly and the police looking for her. One wonders why Babe wanted her out of the way, because she obviously did?
Still, there you have it - Mick obsessing about her "out there, all alone, scared, while we've got each other" (all those phrases were used to expound upon poor, pitiful Shirl's plight, even the habitual excuse of Shirley maintaining a hard front to mask the fact that she's scared.
Oh, My Lord, I didn't mean to torch Ian Beale's restaurant. You see, I was scared. I didn't mean to shoot Phil Mitchell, I was scared.
Actually, how would Mick know that at all, considering the fact that, before last Christmas, he'd not clapped eyes on Shirley for fourteen years? Did she leave her children out of fear? If so, why hasn't that been addressed? Shirley has never impressed me as someone who's fearful or frightened, but rather someone who's impulsive, who has the emotional development of a spoiled adolescent, who's selfish and obsessive, and who isn't above blaming other people or circumstances for her own poor judgement.
Unseen, she dominated the background of the episode from start to finish, even with the Carter "children," and I'm using that term in its fullest context, because the Carter kids do act years younger than they are. They need more than superficial interaction with other people in the Square. Lee is involved with Whitney, but has no other male friends his own age. Johnny has no friends, nor does Nancy, who seldom interacts outside the dynamic. TORS (The Offensive Racial Stereotype - I refuse to use the name of a character who should be long gone based on innate unpopularity) was forbidden to speculate as to whether Phil would give him a pay rise, not because that was in bad taste all around but because ... Oi, that's my auntie you're talking about ... Earlier, Johnny was forbidden by Lee to sympathise with Sharon's plight (Sharon was the one who gave him a job, remember?), when Lee reminded him that Shirley was his aunt. Does that mean that Lee condones Shirley's obvious intention on breaking Sharon and Phil up, that he condones what she did at the wedding breakfast, an event to which she was not invited and should never have been brought by Mick?
At least, Mick prefaced his fact-finding mission to Sharon by saying he didn't condone what Shirley had done, but more of that below.
What happened to Linda was appalling. It was bad enough she had to confront aspects of the rape still extant in her home, many being innocently emphasised by her family - the breakfast group around the table, upon which sat the vase of wedding flowers, which were later thoughtfully (and thoughtlessly) brought into her bedroom by Johnny, and the lunch, again, around the kitchen table, to which Dean suddenly showed up - the kitchen, with Dean, being too much for Linda to harbour.
Anyone with any modicum of common sense could have sussed that Linda wasn't suffering from a hangover, but that something was bothering her. She almost seemed on the point of telling Babe, when Babe showed up and appeared to be concerned about the way Linda looked - "done in", was the way she put it. For one split second, as Linda opened her mouth, you got the impression that she wanted to tell Babe, but couldn't find the words.
However, I noticed two things about this storyline that will impact on its outcome and reveal in the future. The first thing Linda did after her encounter with Dean was take a shower. However, Lee noticed her dress on the bathroom floor, which she rushed to pick up and thrust into the back of her wardrobe. That's crucial, especially if Dean denies the encounter. There should be enough of Dean's DNA, in the form of seminal fluid, on that dress to prove that he had sex with her, and also, Dean's story to Mick of finding "someone" who took his mind off Shirley - the person with whom he used to work leaving The Albert the night before. Mick was surprised the pub was open. All anyone need do is question Sharon to expose the lie. The hard part is convincing various people that a rape occurred, and the longer Linda leaves this, the more difficult the circumstances will prove.
As for Dean's reaction throughout this episode, I was baffled at first. Initially, in the first scene with Tina and Tosh, and later in the salon, I thought he was thinking, possibly in worry and horror, about what he'd done; yet the moment he found out from Mick that Linda had said nothing, he genuinely took that as tacit compliance, and evidence in his warped mind, that Linda had accepted the encounter as consensual, hence the creepy text message and his licence to show up at lunch.
Oddly, throughout this entire Carter inter-exploratory segment of the episode, I thought the weakest link was Danny Dyer. The conversation between him and Dean was contrived, especially with the "Uncle Mick" remark and the obviously foreshadowing line about Shirley ~ And she isn't even my mother.~
Throughout the episode in general, and in the scene with Steve McFadden, Dyer seemed to be winding back and presenting himself as a bad impersonation of Danny Dyer in a gangsta film, rather than Mick Carter, seeking information about his sister-mother.
The Mitchells Old and New. I loved the Ronnie-Sharon interaction. In fact, this episode, more than any, showed Sharon as she was originally, pre-John Yorke's tragedy queen. Sharon didn't behave badly. This was Sharon at the height of her Mitchelldom Mach I in the 90s, and Ronnie would do well not to underestimate her. One thing subtly emphasised the return of Sharon of old, in the hospital, in her blood-stained gown, with Phil, when he apologised. Sharon, smiling, told him they'd talk about what happened when he was stronger, meaning he wasn't off the hook yet about having slept with Shirley and cheated on her.
The Mitchells amaze me at their hypocrisy and their propensity to sell weaker family members down river at the expense of saving their own individual hides. Peggy was quite ready to shop Sam as a suspect in Archie's murder to keep the bizzies away from her or Phil. When Heather was killed, Phil was ready to see Billy arrested and charged. Tonight, it was Ronnie's turn.
It came out early that Ronnie was only interested in getting totally rid of that gun to protect herself. She knew, Phil knew and Sharon knew that the gun originated with Ronnie, and that eventually its ownership would be traced back to her. You can bet your bottom dollar as well, that if Ben had got caught ditching that gun, she'd have been on the next plane out, never to be seen again. At Phil's hospital bed, she as good as admitted, the only way for her to safeguard her existence and to keep her unborn child was to risk sacrifice of another Mitchell, getting rid of the gun.
At the same time, I can understand Sharon's consternation at Phil not wanting to daub Shirley up, thinking she doesn't deserve imprisonment for this. This is the woman who's gleefully strutted around Walford, making dirty sexual innuendo about Sharon, waiting happily to see her publically humiliated, and Phil doesn't want to see her punished? The entire reason Sharon had the gun was down to Phil's actions, and Phil allowing himself to be duped, yet again, by Ronnie in hiding her incriminating evidence.
The Ronnie-Sharon scenes were the best of the episode, I thought. Once again, this was Sharon of old, not to be cowed and patronised by any Mitchell, least of all a retconned one. She gave Ronnie as good as Ronnie gave her, and Ronnie would do well not to underestimate Sharon. Sharon is the daughter of Den Watts and survived Grant Mitchell. As hypocritical as she is, herself - and Sharon is - she does have a moral compass, and I do believe she was so angry that for one moment, she allowed herself the fantasy of grassing Shirley up and taking the whole shabang down with her. And add to that the fact that Sharon, like Peggy, still isn't over the loss of the Vic. Scratch the surface and that's where Sharon's real heart lies. The line about Shirley not being punished but still being in the Vic, lording it over Walford, undeserved, rang especially true. And even though Sharon might hate lying to the police, it's something she's done before. If Ronnie Retcon knows anything about the family history, she'd know that Sharon compromised her best friend, who was shot by a psycho mate of Grant's, into lying about her injury to keep the police away from Sharon and the Mitchells. Ronnie's murder of Carl, also, isn't the first murder for which Sharon's covered - Dennis and Jack Dalton? And Sharon and Phil left Walford in 2006 with Sharon's tacit instructions to Phil to off Jonnie Allen, so she's as much a hard nut, when it comes to it, as Ronnie. Whatever she tells the policemen by Phil's bedside, she'll land Shirley in it in or lie about an unknown shooter in such a way that Madame Queen of Scrotes will be able to return, unscathed, to the Square by the end of November, surely (pun intended).
As for Sharon's confrontation with Mick, that was pretty much on par with Mitchell behaviour as well. Mick may have been genuinely concerned about Phil and Sharon - and moreso about what they planned to do, now that Shirley had shot Phil; but that was the main pupose behind his visit, to gauge Phil's condition and to suss what they planned on doing - whether or not it was safe for Shirley to return. It was the same with his visit to Phil, where Phil denied knowing where Shirley'd got the gun, and there again ... Linda knows. Linda knows about Sharon and the gun, albeit she knows only that Sharon found the gun in Phil's kitchen.
At the end of the day, no one will out Shirley because too many people have too much to lose, including Denny, who now wants to be a Mitchell. After all, Dennis Rickman is dead, isn't he?
No comments:
Post a Comment