Tonight's "hour-long" episode is really tonight's and tomorrow night's episodes spliced together. Tomorrow's episode is the one which would have aired Monday night, but since the BBC is airing non-league Sutton United's FA Cup match against Arsenal, Monday's episode went out the window.
Although tonight's episode was watchable, the show is pretty much going out the window now, with the news that some boy band bankrupt with virtually no acting experience whatsoever has been signed to play the Square's latest attempt at a bad boy. The show has something about helping bankrupt actors. Past charity cases have been Shane Richie, Jamie Foreman and, most recently, Danny Dyer. At least all of them had previour and extensive acting experience. I really do wonder at the direction the show is taking at the moment, as well as some of the Swiss cheese-style storylines - i.e. riddled with all kinds of holes - that it has chosen to pursue.
As I said, tonight's episode was watchable, just barely; but one of the most overriding themes of O'Connor's time as EP has been the almost unbridled cruelty that has emanated from virtually all of the characters - from petty teenaged meanness, to quirky little acts of sabotage against longtime friends, to getting revenge on dead people to just sheer, utter, psychological bullying. Put that alongside the blatant misogyny, and EastEnders is a pretty mean place to be.
How long before any of us forget what Max is supposed to be up to?
The Rapist Ends Up Sucking on a Bottle. One of the most hole-ridden storylines has been the tale of NuMichelle and her teenaged lover, which is simply preposterous. I would say that probably a majority of viewers these days are simply too young to have remembered the real Michelle, played by Susan Tully. Michelle was one of the original characters, and probably the most seminal female character the show has ever produced. However, those who are only familiar with Jenna Russell in the role will now only think of Michelle as a statutory rapist, a sad, drunken woman who's freeloading off her best friend and who poke fun at that best friend's appearance behind her back, who preys on men and boys young enough to be her son. And she's a secret lush.
That's irony. The Mitchells wean Phil off the bottle, and Sharon will probably return to find Michelle propped up on the lounge sofa and surrounded by empty vodka bottles.
Let's start with the simple things first. New Rule: EastEnders must never EVER EVER depict any other character coming from the United States. EVER. First, we had to contend with Mark Wotsit, who thought he was Tim's son,but didn't bother to use his surname, who attended a "British" school rural panhandle Florida. Then we had to contend with Preston, the underaged lover,who tried an American accent, and sounded like a cross between a Canadian and a Russian.
Memo to people attempting to portray Americans: Yes, there are some words we pronounce differently to the way British or English people pronounce them. But we do not say "pay-tronise". It's pronounced with a short "a", the way you lot say it.
Anyway, Preston's been in Walford a couple of days. Why haven't his parents called him? He's a minor. He can't leave the country without their permission. Why haven't the police authorities been contacted here?
Secondly, Michelle knows exactly what she did. She said:-
What I did was a crime. I was lucky I didn't get arrested.
Girlfriend, if this were real life, you'd have been arrested and you'd be awaiting trial right now in an orange jumpsuit. Then finally, she admits to her spray-tanned sugarbaby:-
You're a CHILD!
Yes, he is ... and do you know what that means? Michelle admits that she had sex with ... a child. As Bianca would screech, that's rape. Michelle the rapist, who thought she'd get taken on at a supply teaching agency because she believed, and because Preston the boob-baby reinforced the notion that she was a "good" teacher.
No, Michelle, sadly, you aren't. You ceased to be a good teacher the moment you crossed the line, seduced and had sex with an underaged child to whom you had a duty of care.
And do you know what the creepiest thing about this entire storyline is? That on the night when Michelle confessed to Sharon what she had done, at first Sharon was appalled (and rightly so), but she ended the night by giggling and referring to Michelle as a "cradle-robber." This is a woman who has a young son on the cusp of adolescence. She trusted her lifelong friend enough to leave her in charge of her son and her underaged step-daughter, and Michelle moves her underaged toyboy in at the earliest convenience. Yes, I know that at 17, in this country, Preston is of age, but he isn't a citizen of this country, and that leads to the third fallacy ...
That he blagged on and on about coming here to be with her. Sorry to be obtuse, but when you come into the UK with a US passport that doesn't say "Given leave to enter the United Kingdom and remain for an indefinite period," you are asked how long you're going to stay and why you are here. You're also viewed suspiciously if you enter on a one-way ticket, which he obviously did because Michelle had to sort him out a ticket home. The idea that anyone can just up stakes and go to the US (Martin), the UK (Preston) or even New Zealand (Peter and Lauren), who have no educational or marketable skills or any means of support is pretty ludicrous.
I'm beginning to wonder if this kid had some sort of Oedipal complex, obviously so. It isn't a matter of Michelle being ten or even fifteen years older than Preston. She's thirty years older than he. He's a minor, and the only excuse she can think to give her brother for his presence is that he's a friend of her twenty-one year-old son. He wants a future with Michelle. In twenty years' time, he'll still be a young man, and she'll be pushing seventy.
At least the programme showed exactly how small the world is, and it was totally realistic that, within minutes, the supply agency had received enough of Michelle's professional references to know exactly what she did and why they, as professionals, couldn't trust her around impressionable adolescent males. In the end, she actually acknowledged that her lover was a child. That realisation must make her, a mother, feel like a prize piece of shit. Would she countenance any other adult taking advantage of her children this way. I mean, has she even mentioned Vicki in all of this?
I hope that "Preston" isn't sticking around to flirt with Rebecca. Where would he stay? And how long before Martin is made aware of what Michelle has done? I thought it funny that TPTB had given him a spray tan to indicate that he came from Florida. By the way, he's from the Gulf area, the Panhandle. That area isn't as culturally diverse in terms of Caribbean culture, as he indicated regarding cuisine. He'd be more attuned to Paula Deene's downhome grits'n jowls than anything Latino.
The line of the night went to Michelle:-
I had to give you money for your dinner!
... as well as the fact that he stomped off in an adolescent sulk when she told him he was exactly what he was.
Mmmm-MMMM! (As we say in the South). I'll bet his mamma takes a two-by-four to his spray-tanned ass when he gets off that plane.
I have to say, I'm astounded that it never even entered into Michelle's mind that a supply agency would request references for her - they must have wondered what she was doing here during the school term, anyway - or that her former employers wouldn't mention the reason for her dismissal. It's called duty of care.
And of course at the end of the day, she reaches for the bottle.
The Wise Women of Walford. I get it that a great part of these two-for-one episodes was a tribute to June Brown, but to give her a two-part storyline which consisted of her sitting beside a washing machine thinking that her cat had got wedged down behind the back of it, whilst playing the radio and talking to no one in particular wasn't funny nor in any way a tribute.
And are we to believe that now that the launderette is closed, Dot takes in Ian's and Jack's and Kim's washing and ironing? For a cream bun? Doesn't Kim have a washing machine, anyway? What is that all about? I can see her doing Jack's laundry. He's family, and he's her stepson. I like his relationship with Dot.
I also like Stacey, but I'm beginning to draw the line at her being presented as the font of all wisdom to people who've lived longer and seen more than she has, when she isn't even thirty yet.
Jack is grieving and feuding with a dead woman. Sneakily refusing to honour Amy's wishes and leave the Valentine's card on Roxy's grave, as well as refusing to acknowledge Roxy on the joint gravestone. Roxy wasn't responsible for Ronnie's death. The only person responsible for Ronnie's death was Ronnie. What bride on her wedding night traipses off to down two bottles of bubbly with her sister rather than spending time with her husband?
That's what killed Ronnie. That decision and her wedding dress.
Stacey was right to tell him that it's not right that he keep the memory of Roxy from Amy. Roxy was Amy's mother. She's old enough to retain memories of Roxy, ,and her questions about her won't go away. Roxy is the mother of one of Jack's children. She may have been a flake, but she loved Amy unconditionally, and Amy loved her.
And this nonsense about not wanting to move on was the height of selfishness for Jack, but then selfishness is the key to the Brannings' persona. We had two references to Bradley tonight - one by Max, which prompted Jack to have the maudlin scene at Ronnie's grave where he spoke to her, but neglected to leave Amy's card, and then the oblique reference by Stacey to Bradley's death 7 years ago and how she found happiness again. She also referenced Ryan and how she never bad-mouthed him to Lily, which was a curious remark, since Ryan is all loved-up in Yorkshire and hasn't been near Lily - did he even see her when he was here for Whitney's wedding? - and besides, Martin introduced her to Preston earlier as his daughter. She's called Lily Fowler now.
At first I wondered why Stacey was hanging out around Jack, and then I realised that Amy and Lily were friends.
Dot helped by gently pushing the symbolic act of Jack dealing with Ronnie's clothes and belongings. At least, by the end of the episode, he was acknowledging Roxy's importance in Amy's life and memories.
Glad they found Dave, however.
Teenaged Angst and Unrealistic Expectations. Please stop pushing Jasmine Whatever's singing talents. All we got in this episode is Shakil peering at a tablet and her tinny voice, and the odious Keegan gurning. Not to mention the obviously twenty-something Rat's Nest and Sniggle winding Louise up about a boy we've barely seen. Keegan? Travis? Where do they get these names?
The teens are boring and unlikable, and I rue the fact that the show has chosen to bring them to the forefront of the show. The friendship of Louise and Rebecca rings hollow as well - on again and off again, depending on what boy they fancy. Is Louise so thick as to not see she was being used and manipulated by the Rat's Nest and Sniggle? And these are girls who are supposed to be a full year younger than Rebecca! Doesn't she have friends in her own year?
And Ben and Jay take on the rent of what appears to be a three-bedroomed terraced house. One half of Max's and Tanya's old front room was rented out to Lee and Whitney for £1500 per month. How much must a house like that cost?
Jay is a go-fer in a funeral parlour. He can't be earning much above minimum wage. Ben is probably better off, as he appears to be managing the Arches, which is a total anathema, because there is no way Ben has any sort of professional qualifications to work on the sophisticated late model car engines of today, much less any apparatus with which to work with them. Three-bedroomed properties in that area of London to rent must be exhorbitant. And maybe Kathy kept some of that Gavin money to help with the deposit.
And speaking of places to rent, there's an empty two-bedroomed flat going begging above Coker and Son, which, I'm sure, Pam and Les would let them rent for a peppercorn.
Absence Makes the Heart Grow Fonder. Nice to see Mick shitting himself at Lee's disappearance and the fact that he's not returning anyone's calls. But he is still so obtuse as to not to understand why Lee left. We still hear him bleating on about wanting "the boy" to show some responsibility, to "step up." Even Johnny referred to him as a loser.
As for Whitney, she's playing up the victim stakes, whining to all and sundry about Lee telling her he didn't love her. Neither she nor Mick are able to acknowledge the part they may have played in driving Lee away. Since his condition was diagnosed, she's been fearful of his depression returning - and so she did the very thing that sent him spiralling downward, by putting immense pressure and expectations on him to live up to her ideal; and Mick's done nothing but tell him to "man up" - oh, and don't think I didn't notice Kush dishing out the same sort of advice to Shakil about Rebecca tonight - man up, and talk to her, when maybe he had just accepted that she might have wanted to move on.
Mick is beginning to worry now because he's afraid that Linda may have a way of finding out where he was, or as Shirley suggested, maybe he went to Linda. Now, after the fact, Shirley's offering platitudes like saying that Lee just needed some space. That wasn't what she was saying earlier. They wanted him to walk away from his marriage because he didn't deserve his skank of a wife, who loves Mick anyway. Did they really think he would have stayed in Walford? Mick wouldn't have allowed him through the door.
And how much of a child is Mick? He's so unstrung, that he has to go out for a walk with Mummy. I ask you.
The abject blindness to all concerned about what they did to Lee was astounding, even silly Whitney's attempt to gain Mick's admiration by bravely showing up to do her shift. It's a good thing she was too engrossed in gabbing with Lauren to hear the phonecall that Lee made.
He wants to see Mick. I hope he tells him some good, blunt home truths.
And Finally. Ian will have some health problems, and Shirley will have a Pole.
Although tonight's episode was watchable, the show is pretty much going out the window now, with the news that some boy band bankrupt with virtually no acting experience whatsoever has been signed to play the Square's latest attempt at a bad boy. The show has something about helping bankrupt actors. Past charity cases have been Shane Richie, Jamie Foreman and, most recently, Danny Dyer. At least all of them had previour and extensive acting experience. I really do wonder at the direction the show is taking at the moment, as well as some of the Swiss cheese-style storylines - i.e. riddled with all kinds of holes - that it has chosen to pursue.
As I said, tonight's episode was watchable, just barely; but one of the most overriding themes of O'Connor's time as EP has been the almost unbridled cruelty that has emanated from virtually all of the characters - from petty teenaged meanness, to quirky little acts of sabotage against longtime friends, to getting revenge on dead people to just sheer, utter, psychological bullying. Put that alongside the blatant misogyny, and EastEnders is a pretty mean place to be.
How long before any of us forget what Max is supposed to be up to?
The Rapist Ends Up Sucking on a Bottle. One of the most hole-ridden storylines has been the tale of NuMichelle and her teenaged lover, which is simply preposterous. I would say that probably a majority of viewers these days are simply too young to have remembered the real Michelle, played by Susan Tully. Michelle was one of the original characters, and probably the most seminal female character the show has ever produced. However, those who are only familiar with Jenna Russell in the role will now only think of Michelle as a statutory rapist, a sad, drunken woman who's freeloading off her best friend and who poke fun at that best friend's appearance behind her back, who preys on men and boys young enough to be her son. And she's a secret lush.
That's irony. The Mitchells wean Phil off the bottle, and Sharon will probably return to find Michelle propped up on the lounge sofa and surrounded by empty vodka bottles.
Let's start with the simple things first. New Rule: EastEnders must never EVER EVER depict any other character coming from the United States. EVER. First, we had to contend with Mark Wotsit, who thought he was Tim's son,but didn't bother to use his surname, who attended a "British" school rural panhandle Florida. Then we had to contend with Preston, the underaged lover,who tried an American accent, and sounded like a cross between a Canadian and a Russian.
Memo to people attempting to portray Americans: Yes, there are some words we pronounce differently to the way British or English people pronounce them. But we do not say "pay-tronise". It's pronounced with a short "a", the way you lot say it.
Anyway, Preston's been in Walford a couple of days. Why haven't his parents called him? He's a minor. He can't leave the country without their permission. Why haven't the police authorities been contacted here?
Secondly, Michelle knows exactly what she did. She said:-
What I did was a crime. I was lucky I didn't get arrested.
Girlfriend, if this were real life, you'd have been arrested and you'd be awaiting trial right now in an orange jumpsuit. Then finally, she admits to her spray-tanned sugarbaby:-
You're a CHILD!
Yes, he is ... and do you know what that means? Michelle admits that she had sex with ... a child. As Bianca would screech, that's rape. Michelle the rapist, who thought she'd get taken on at a supply teaching agency because she believed, and because Preston the boob-baby reinforced the notion that she was a "good" teacher.
No, Michelle, sadly, you aren't. You ceased to be a good teacher the moment you crossed the line, seduced and had sex with an underaged child to whom you had a duty of care.
And do you know what the creepiest thing about this entire storyline is? That on the night when Michelle confessed to Sharon what she had done, at first Sharon was appalled (and rightly so), but she ended the night by giggling and referring to Michelle as a "cradle-robber." This is a woman who has a young son on the cusp of adolescence. She trusted her lifelong friend enough to leave her in charge of her son and her underaged step-daughter, and Michelle moves her underaged toyboy in at the earliest convenience. Yes, I know that at 17, in this country, Preston is of age, but he isn't a citizen of this country, and that leads to the third fallacy ...
That he blagged on and on about coming here to be with her. Sorry to be obtuse, but when you come into the UK with a US passport that doesn't say "Given leave to enter the United Kingdom and remain for an indefinite period," you are asked how long you're going to stay and why you are here. You're also viewed suspiciously if you enter on a one-way ticket, which he obviously did because Michelle had to sort him out a ticket home. The idea that anyone can just up stakes and go to the US (Martin), the UK (Preston) or even New Zealand (Peter and Lauren), who have no educational or marketable skills or any means of support is pretty ludicrous.
I'm beginning to wonder if this kid had some sort of Oedipal complex, obviously so. It isn't a matter of Michelle being ten or even fifteen years older than Preston. She's thirty years older than he. He's a minor, and the only excuse she can think to give her brother for his presence is that he's a friend of her twenty-one year-old son. He wants a future with Michelle. In twenty years' time, he'll still be a young man, and she'll be pushing seventy.
At least the programme showed exactly how small the world is, and it was totally realistic that, within minutes, the supply agency had received enough of Michelle's professional references to know exactly what she did and why they, as professionals, couldn't trust her around impressionable adolescent males. In the end, she actually acknowledged that her lover was a child. That realisation must make her, a mother, feel like a prize piece of shit. Would she countenance any other adult taking advantage of her children this way. I mean, has she even mentioned Vicki in all of this?
I hope that "Preston" isn't sticking around to flirt with Rebecca. Where would he stay? And how long before Martin is made aware of what Michelle has done? I thought it funny that TPTB had given him a spray tan to indicate that he came from Florida. By the way, he's from the Gulf area, the Panhandle. That area isn't as culturally diverse in terms of Caribbean culture, as he indicated regarding cuisine. He'd be more attuned to Paula Deene's downhome grits'n jowls than anything Latino.
The line of the night went to Michelle:-
I had to give you money for your dinner!
... as well as the fact that he stomped off in an adolescent sulk when she told him he was exactly what he was.
Mmmm-MMMM! (As we say in the South). I'll bet his mamma takes a two-by-four to his spray-tanned ass when he gets off that plane.
I have to say, I'm astounded that it never even entered into Michelle's mind that a supply agency would request references for her - they must have wondered what she was doing here during the school term, anyway - or that her former employers wouldn't mention the reason for her dismissal. It's called duty of care.
And of course at the end of the day, she reaches for the bottle.
The Wise Women of Walford. I get it that a great part of these two-for-one episodes was a tribute to June Brown, but to give her a two-part storyline which consisted of her sitting beside a washing machine thinking that her cat had got wedged down behind the back of it, whilst playing the radio and talking to no one in particular wasn't funny nor in any way a tribute.
And are we to believe that now that the launderette is closed, Dot takes in Ian's and Jack's and Kim's washing and ironing? For a cream bun? Doesn't Kim have a washing machine, anyway? What is that all about? I can see her doing Jack's laundry. He's family, and he's her stepson. I like his relationship with Dot.
I also like Stacey, but I'm beginning to draw the line at her being presented as the font of all wisdom to people who've lived longer and seen more than she has, when she isn't even thirty yet.
Jack is grieving and feuding with a dead woman. Sneakily refusing to honour Amy's wishes and leave the Valentine's card on Roxy's grave, as well as refusing to acknowledge Roxy on the joint gravestone. Roxy wasn't responsible for Ronnie's death. The only person responsible for Ronnie's death was Ronnie. What bride on her wedding night traipses off to down two bottles of bubbly with her sister rather than spending time with her husband?
That's what killed Ronnie. That decision and her wedding dress.
Stacey was right to tell him that it's not right that he keep the memory of Roxy from Amy. Roxy was Amy's mother. She's old enough to retain memories of Roxy, ,and her questions about her won't go away. Roxy is the mother of one of Jack's children. She may have been a flake, but she loved Amy unconditionally, and Amy loved her.
And this nonsense about not wanting to move on was the height of selfishness for Jack, but then selfishness is the key to the Brannings' persona. We had two references to Bradley tonight - one by Max, which prompted Jack to have the maudlin scene at Ronnie's grave where he spoke to her, but neglected to leave Amy's card, and then the oblique reference by Stacey to Bradley's death 7 years ago and how she found happiness again. She also referenced Ryan and how she never bad-mouthed him to Lily, which was a curious remark, since Ryan is all loved-up in Yorkshire and hasn't been near Lily - did he even see her when he was here for Whitney's wedding? - and besides, Martin introduced her to Preston earlier as his daughter. She's called Lily Fowler now.
At first I wondered why Stacey was hanging out around Jack, and then I realised that Amy and Lily were friends.
Dot helped by gently pushing the symbolic act of Jack dealing with Ronnie's clothes and belongings. At least, by the end of the episode, he was acknowledging Roxy's importance in Amy's life and memories.
Glad they found Dave, however.
Teenaged Angst and Unrealistic Expectations. Please stop pushing Jasmine Whatever's singing talents. All we got in this episode is Shakil peering at a tablet and her tinny voice, and the odious Keegan gurning. Not to mention the obviously twenty-something Rat's Nest and Sniggle winding Louise up about a boy we've barely seen. Keegan? Travis? Where do they get these names?
The teens are boring and unlikable, and I rue the fact that the show has chosen to bring them to the forefront of the show. The friendship of Louise and Rebecca rings hollow as well - on again and off again, depending on what boy they fancy. Is Louise so thick as to not see she was being used and manipulated by the Rat's Nest and Sniggle? And these are girls who are supposed to be a full year younger than Rebecca! Doesn't she have friends in her own year?
And Ben and Jay take on the rent of what appears to be a three-bedroomed terraced house. One half of Max's and Tanya's old front room was rented out to Lee and Whitney for £1500 per month. How much must a house like that cost?
Jay is a go-fer in a funeral parlour. He can't be earning much above minimum wage. Ben is probably better off, as he appears to be managing the Arches, which is a total anathema, because there is no way Ben has any sort of professional qualifications to work on the sophisticated late model car engines of today, much less any apparatus with which to work with them. Three-bedroomed properties in that area of London to rent must be exhorbitant. And maybe Kathy kept some of that Gavin money to help with the deposit.
And speaking of places to rent, there's an empty two-bedroomed flat going begging above Coker and Son, which, I'm sure, Pam and Les would let them rent for a peppercorn.
Absence Makes the Heart Grow Fonder. Nice to see Mick shitting himself at Lee's disappearance and the fact that he's not returning anyone's calls. But he is still so obtuse as to not to understand why Lee left. We still hear him bleating on about wanting "the boy" to show some responsibility, to "step up." Even Johnny referred to him as a loser.
As for Whitney, she's playing up the victim stakes, whining to all and sundry about Lee telling her he didn't love her. Neither she nor Mick are able to acknowledge the part they may have played in driving Lee away. Since his condition was diagnosed, she's been fearful of his depression returning - and so she did the very thing that sent him spiralling downward, by putting immense pressure and expectations on him to live up to her ideal; and Mick's done nothing but tell him to "man up" - oh, and don't think I didn't notice Kush dishing out the same sort of advice to Shakil about Rebecca tonight - man up, and talk to her, when maybe he had just accepted that she might have wanted to move on.
Mick is beginning to worry now because he's afraid that Linda may have a way of finding out where he was, or as Shirley suggested, maybe he went to Linda. Now, after the fact, Shirley's offering platitudes like saying that Lee just needed some space. That wasn't what she was saying earlier. They wanted him to walk away from his marriage because he didn't deserve his skank of a wife, who loves Mick anyway. Did they really think he would have stayed in Walford? Mick wouldn't have allowed him through the door.
And how much of a child is Mick? He's so unstrung, that he has to go out for a walk with Mummy. I ask you.
The abject blindness to all concerned about what they did to Lee was astounding, even silly Whitney's attempt to gain Mick's admiration by bravely showing up to do her shift. It's a good thing she was too engrossed in gabbing with Lauren to hear the phonecall that Lee made.
He wants to see Mick. I hope he tells him some good, blunt home truths.
And Finally. Ian will have some health problems, and Shirley will have a Pole.
No comments:
Post a Comment