Joey's the Tadpole to Derek's Toad

Not long ago, when the latest bit of British beefcake, long on looks and short on any acting experience, first graced the Eastenders' screen, men and women shrieked with orgasmic pleasure, especially over photos like this:-

Or this:-

Not long ago - last year, as a matter of fact - those selfsame starfuckers were expostulating over another piece of prime British steak, until they saw for themselves that his acting talents were non-existent. Remember him?

You know, I remember a time when Eastenders hired talented young actors who just happened to be able to act as well as being a bit of eye candy - people like Nick Berry or Michael French or Ross Kemp, even Robert Kazinsky and Nigel Harman more recently. Now, however, all it seems to take to be added to the cast as a principle male ingenue is a background in modeling underwear and the ability to take off your shirt and flash your pecs.

The sad truth about David Witts is, simply, that, like Tony Discipline, there is no acting experience and no noticeable talent. Discipline's diction is non-existent; Witts is obviously a well-spoken lad who can't master (or won't stoop to master) a Cockney accent. His trick around that is to lower his voice to a gravely whisper a la Beppe di Marco or Steve Owen and speak rapidly (but indistinguishably).

He has other tricks as well. Discipline's manner of physically denoting any sort of emotion is to screw his eyes and wrinkle his nose, in a facial pose that can denote anything. You name it - pain, sorrow, anger, threat, sexual allure, constipation. It's straight from the Joey-from-Friends smell-the-fart acting school. 

Witts has a trick of his own. In order to denote how sexy and moody and mysterious he is, he rotates his head quickly from left to right, glancing about stealthily, allows his mouth to hang open and lolls his tongue from cheek to cheek. It signifies nothing, but I suppose the actor thinks it's subtly phallic.

Believe me, it's not. In fact, the Italians have a word to describe anyone who'd behave that way in public. Such people are called deficienti. Google the meaning.

However, people were willing to forgive even the basest lack of talent in Witts simply because he physically resembled Dennis Rickman (played by an actor with real talent, Nigel Harman). Want to see how versatile an actor Harman is?

This is Harman's last appearance as Dennis Rickman:-

And here he is in his Olivier Award-winning role as Lord Farquaad in Shrek: The Musical:-

Any resemblance Mr Witts's character bears to the the dear, departed Dennis Rickman is simply passing and nothing more. And, newsflash: A villain can be "hot" too, just like the most hateful of bitches can be painfully attractive - Cindy, anyone?

Even before Joey appeared upon our screens, we were told by the PR blurbs coming from the Eastenders' press office that Joey was a charmer, a pathological liar, a manipulator ... in short, the proverbial bad-boy.

I think people then thought of him as the archetypical Eastenders' bad boy - Grant, Dennis, Sean Slater - hard and bad on the exterior, but with a vulnerable core exposed and ministered to by the love of a good woman/girl. In fact, in the wake of that announcement, the press office then announce a pairing of Joey (whose age must be at least 24) with the elfin rag, bone and hank of hair 18 year-old Lucy Beale, and then proceeded to market the pair as the next Eastenders' power couple, this generation's Grant and Sharon.

Yes, I know that for most long-term viewers, that's total blasphemy; in fact, considering the lack of talent emanating from these two ex-models, instead of resembling Grant and Sharon, I'd say they could be more closely described as charter members of the Society of Mouth-Breathers, as both seem to think it singularly attractive to hold their mouths agape when not speaking lines.

Joey is anything but the next Grant. He isn't the next Dennis and not even the next Sean. Let's be brutally blunt: Joey is not a nice person.

Joey is the son of Derek. Son of Toad equals Tadpole. Derek is a liar. Joey is a liar. Derek is a manipulator (cf: how he got Carol to allow him to move into Casa Butcher); Joey is a manipulater. Derek is over-protective of Alice; Joey is over-protective of Alice. Derek is a control freak; Joey is a control freak. Derek hates Joey; Joey hates Derek.

Do you see why?

Let's be brutally honest about Joey. He is not a nice person, and although he'll never admit it, the apple didn't fall far from the tree in relation to him and his old man. That's why they can't stand each other. 

And if there were any doubt about Joey being the soft-centred hard boy whom Lucy would redeem, it was dispelled during the past two episodes, especially last night, when the beefed-up berk actually threw Ian Beale out of the cafe he owned due to the contrived overreaction of Ian's skinny, little bitch of a daughter, Lucy.

In case you haven't twigged, Joey doesn't love Lucy. The only girl Joey thinks anything of is his sister, Alice. Lucy is a convenience, and Joey's recognised the fact that she's stupid enough and desperate enough to give him sex as thanks for him having bailed her out of the shit she was in.

It wasn't rocket science. Joey's dad was bullying her. Easy enough for Joey to flount Derek, scam him out of money and rescue Lucy from the bailiff's plight. Joey gives Lucy money and Lucy allows Joey to live, rent-free, in Ian's home and sleeps with him, someone she's known only a matter of weeks.

There's a name for a girl who'll trade sex for money and protection.

Joey's little set-up gives him a vantage point where he's still able to keep an eye on and exert control over his sister, enables him to needle his old man, and at the same time he's got a bag of bones warm body to pork each night. And he's sussed that he'll be able to enjoy these creature comforts for the time being because she's vulnerable and thick, having chosen to cope on her own when her father suddenly disappeared a couple of months ago. Easy-peasy pickings enough to convince her that fathers are a liability and that a gal's better off with beefcake in her bed rather than a daddy breathing down her neck.

Yep, the power couple with their own little empire. Except ... that this doesn't bode well for Joey as a future long-term character. He's actually dissing and pissing on one of two remaining original characters in the show. Ian Beale is Walford royalty, and Joey Branning is pondlife.

I highly suspect Derek's shelf life will come to an end at Christmas, and maybe this interference with Lolligag Luce will last until that time; because once Ian's in command of his faculties again, I don't see the Tadpole being long-term on the Square, once his motives are sussed or once he betrays Lucy or once he and she have managed to run Ian's businesses into the ground.

Tadpoles are sometimes used as bait for bigger fish as well, remember.

The Slappable and Eminently Stupid Lucy Beale

Cack Jarr AKA Jarkdeluxe  (better JERKdeluxe) is defending the indefensible Lucy Beale on Digital Spy, trying to justify her actions against her ill father and trying to present her in a sympathetic light.

Crock of bullshit.

Lucy is one of the most spoiled and entitled characters in the programme, plus she's not really very bright.

She's done nothing all her adolescent life other than undermine Ian and treat him like shit. Ian isn't entirely blameless. He spoiled his children rotten and actually left Jane, his last wife, in absolutely no doubt that she could hold no sway over his children. His house, his furniture, his businesses and his children. Jane was just the skivvy who slept with the boss.

When Ian disappeared, anyone who was eighteen and who aspired to have any sort of common sense would have rung the police and reported Ian missing, then contacted Jane. Jane wouldn't have ferretted Bobby away; instead, she would have dropped everything, including her job and returned to Walford, where she would have stayed until something had been found out about Ian or until he had been found; she would have taken charge of the businesses and sorted something with Ian's creditors. Maybe Christian would have helped.

Instead, she went directly to Phil Mitchell, whose only interest in Ian was to find him in order to prevent him from talking about Ben's confession, the single act which tipped Ian over the edge. He offered nothing to Lucy other than a wad of cash to tide her over and suggestions that she start selling off Ian's assets - as if she could, because everything is in Ian's name. I still want to know how she managed to sell Mandy's car, because the title deed was either in Ian's name or Mandy's. That's technically selling property which doesn't belong to you and that's against the law. But apparently the vast majority of Eastenders' writing room neglects that situation.

Now she's shacked up with Derek's Tadpole, ostensibly enjoying his tadpole, which Tadpole uses freely to keep various females onside. Both are really pretty pathetic as actors. Hetti Bywater thinks that having her mouth hang open variously makes her look sexy or vulnerable. It doesn't. It makes her look deficient. David Witts thinks hanging his mouth open and lolling his tongue about from cheek to cheek makes him look moody and brooding. It doesn't. it also makes him look deficient. They are mouth-breathers.

Joey's backstory is that he's a liar, a cheat and as scummy as his old man, but he thinks he's so far above Derek morally that his shit doesn't stink. He doesn't love Lucy at all, although little Lollygagger think she's hit paydirt with him. He's using her as a means to get back at his old man. The only woman he's even remotely bothered about is his sister and that's a means of control.

Lucy was just some reasonably attractive (and stupid) girl who responded to his charms enough to crawl into bed with him after he paid some of her debts.  That's actually a mild form of prostitution. He's seen she's got a daddy issue and he's manipulated her enough to gain a free place to stay, a bag of bones to sit upon his tadpole nightly and a vantage point from which to keep an eye on his sister and to badger his old man.

It will all end in tears.

Joey is no Dennis Rickman. He's not even fit to clean Dennis Rickman's boots, and he's no vulnerable bad boy. He's simply a better-looking and younger version of his father - a Tadpole to Derek's Toad.

As another commentator with astoundingly more common sense than Cack Jarr AKA JerkJarkdeluxe stated on Digital Spy earlier, I await the day when Ian is hale and hearty enough to kick Joey's' steroidically-enhanced skank ass and the bony ass of his own daughter out of his house and away from his businesses.

Bullies and Bitches: Review 07.08.2012

I've watched Eastenders since its very beginning, and I have to say that I've never known a more unlikeable bunch of youngsters on the programme. Indeed, I've never known so many youngsters at one time; but most of the young people who've been on the show in the past have had a drive or a purpose, or - at the very least - some positive part about their role and their direction on the show.

The first lot of youngsters - Sharon, Michelle and Ian - wanted to better themselves, to move ahead of their parents in aspirations, and ofttimes, they struggled against all sorts of odds in order to achieve their goals. Michelle, and later Sonia, were teenaged mums, who managed to achieve degrees and professional qualifications against all odds. Even Tiffany Mitchell and Bianca, during her first stint, progressed from dippy, irresponsible, mouthy schoolgirls into wives and mothers.

But this lot - in particular, Lucy, Lauren and Whitney - are privileged, entitled, spoiled brats, sustained by over-indulgent parents in the past, lazy and with no direction in life or arrogant beyond belief in their self-victimisation. Did I mention rude? Well, rude too.

Lucy AKA Lollygag Luce and Lauren were particularly slappable tonight. I'm referring to the scene in the cafe when Max approached Lucy about seeing Ian, only to be rudely rebuffed by that skinny-assed, little bitch who loftily informed him that the only opinion she valued was her own. And of course, leave it to Lollygag to poo-poo the idea of talking out her troubles with Tanya,  an adult and a mother; instead, the patron saint of gurning, Lauren, offers her services and invaluable judgement, instead - especially, her advice to Fatboy to walk away from any career-enhancement suggestions to his boss. Why? Because, in Lauren's inestimable opinion, Fatboy's boss is a fascist. As if she even knows the meaning of the word.

Lauren doesn't work. So she sits in the cafe her BFF has hoisted from her father - and I'm STILL trying to figure out how Lucy's got control of Ian's business accounts and has become signatory on them - most probably getting freebies from Lollygag Luce, she of the gaping mouth. Max and Tanya do absolutely nothing about pressuring her into getting a job.

Lollygag Lucy showed how stupid, callous and what an all-round vicious little bitch she is by screaming blue murder when Ian entered the cafe, which she'd named after her mother, the original Walford slut, whom she idolises. She is so patently stupid she doesn't even realise that Ben is not a Beale. And I positively cringed when the Toad's Tadpole threw Ian out then solicitously sought to help him. I was glad Christian was on hand for that and that he called Lucy a liar. I'd have called her something more for the remark she made about Jane.

Lucy had no right to say what she said about Jane not being a part of their lives. Lucy treated Jane like shit. Lucy was the reason behind Jane getting shot and being unable to have children. Lucy lied to Jane about her abortion, supported by the father she thinks "abandoned" her, and even if Lucy thinks and believes all of the above, encouraged by Tadpole's magic tadpole porking her skinny fanny adams nightly, she should know that Jane is actually Bobby's legal mother and can whisk him away to Wales in a fucking New York minute.

Lollygag whines that Ian "chose" Mandy over her; her sainted mother was Ian's original trophy wife, who betrayed him twice - and was rescued after the first betrayal from a squalid bedsit by Ian. Mandy was a much-needed link with Ian's past after Jane left. Mandy remembered Ian's parents, his Auntie Pauline and Mark. With Pat dead, and Sharon and Michelle living far away, Mandy was the Ian's last link with his past, even moreso when Ben made his confession to him; and if even a cretin would have been able to see that Ian was on the cusp of a breakdown, but all Lucy was concerned about was herself and sabotaging Mandy.

Then we have the interminably distasteful Shaggerman storyline, with Alfie's slut of a wife, Katshit, now cooing flirtatiously with the mystery man down the phone, absconding all work responsibility at the pub she runs with Alfie in order to go off with her porker without a soupcon of guilt or remorse. This is beyond low, and I seriously hope that Newman shows brass and slaps this botoxed po-faced slapper with the heavy karma she needs. The majority of viewers want Kat gone and gone before Christmas.

Ray was eliminated as the Shagger suspect tonight, which lengthens the Brannings odds not to 80%, although there was a strong whiff of suspicion surrounding Michael tonight, who lied about being with Tyler and Anthony. Or maybe he was and I missed that. I hope Shagger isn't Michael. I still think Derek's the man in question, and he and Kat deserve each other.

I hope the storyline around Janine is pointing to her having post-natal depression, and that wouldn't surprise me at all. She's a new mother, who's been through a traumatic birth and a critical time with a sick child in hospital; and her trust issues with Michael are coming to the fore. The last thing she needed was creepy Jean coming around, with an apology which was half-assed at the best - apologising for telling Janine on her wedding day, when she told Janine her child wouldn't be loved - whilst, at the same time, "reminding" Janine of the pain she put Saint Jean and Even More Saintly Stacey through.

BULLSHIT! Stacey broke up Janine's marriage. Stacey contributed to Janine's emotional fragility, which was still evident when she became involved with Michael and was behind her reticence to become intimately involved with him when she fell pregnant. Add to that the fact that she is still mourning and missing Pat, and Jean's cack-handed apology was something she didn't need to hear. If anything, it freaked her out even more. I hate the fact that Janine is going to leave Scarlett because she thinks she isn't worthy to be a mother, based on bile that c*** Kat is going to tell her; but one thing I don't want to see is creepy Jean getting involved with Scarlett in her absence.

The Olympic scene was cringeworthy. Not only had Jean's noticeably shorter hair grown out suddenly, but Tony Discipline - one week before he's due to appear in Crown Court on a serious criminal charge - is still hanging around as a cast member.

And finally, Phil, who hit a new moral low tonight, perfectly at ease with and hoping that Ian remains in a catatonic state, with his mind gone in order to ensure Phil's and Ben's safety. Karma gonna hit Phil hard.

I'm amazed that Shirley, who's usually pretty sharp about these things, failed to realise that Ian's reaction in turning the television off came about when Shirley mentioned Heather's name and not when she mentioned St Lollygag of the Mouth-Breathers' Association.

Finally, we now begin the countdown to Ben's ultimate comeuppanc, with Denise unwittingly having possession of the instrument of Heather's demise.

The Unmistakeable Stench of Katshit

Do Eastenders and its ubiquitous powers that be realise now just how much the character of Kat is hated and reviled? Do they realise the extent to which she is disliked by a viewing public who used to consider her iconic? Do they realise that she is now past redemption?

Sure, the public love a tart with a heart - Bet Lynch, Bev in Brookside, even Eastenders' own Pat, who developed into a much-loved matriarchal figure; but everyone, without exception, hates, loathes and despises a common slut with no redeeming qualities.

Those of us who are long-term viewers, and even those of us who only started watching the show from the beginning of John Yorke's tenure and were old enough to understand just where he and, subsequently, Louise Berridge, Kathleen Hutchison and Kate Harwood took Kat's character, understood Kat's character arc perfectly.

She was an abused child, whose mother either refused to believe her stories of abuse at the hands of her uncle or hid the fact from her husband. Because of this, when she fell pregnant, Kat contrived the inevitable story of a faceless, nameless boy behind the bike sheds, which resulted in her much-loved father considering her nothing less than a common little slapper who'd indulge in such behaviour.

Kat then proceeded to make his assumptions a reality; but such behaviour was only a manifestation of low self-esteem and self-hatred. She needed redemption in the form of someone who loved her for what she was and understood her trauma. That was Alfie, whose surname was a play on her wishing for a "man in the moon."

Kat won Alfie and lost him through her behaviour, but worked her ass off and succeeded winning his love again. When they left, as a couple, there was closure to their characters. They were the couple for whom everyone rooted and wanted happiness, and you knew that they would achieve it. Also, they proved that in soap terms, closure on characters doesn't necessarily mean death.

Their return should have seen such a positive couple on a higher level. Instead, Bryan Kirkwood brought them back in order to toy with him along his own specifications. Kirkwood took established characters and played with them as though they were human manifestations of Barbie and Ken dolls. Anything established by another producer was made to be "unestablished" by Kirkwood.

And Kirkwood weakened any man whose surname wasn't Branning.

Thus, we saw Kat return as a vile, self-obsessed, narcissistic, ball-breaking, domestic abuser. He may not have intended it thus, but he presented viewers with a well-known statistic: that abused children often grow into abusers, themselves. We'd already seen this pattern in Phil, Billy and Archie Mitchell; now we had it in Kat - the way she physically assaulted Alfie in person, the way she publically humiliated him by impugning his sexual prowess, the way she emotionally and psychologically wore him down from the getgo. She was even singularly unsympathetic during the babyswap storyline. She certainly was thereafter.

The nadir of her behaviour, until now, was the random shag-with-a-stranger in an alleyway because she was pissed off that Alfie didn't comment on her new whore-tailored frock. When she ultimately confessed her bad behaviour, she absconded any and all responsibility for the act. She was a "dirty girl." She dressed like a slut and men smelled the slut on her, so they wanted to rut her and she wanted to rut back. That was just the way she was. End of.

Alfie should have kicked her skank ass to the curb; she's not worthy of his love. Even later, when she was away, and Roxy confessed her genuine love for him, he turned her down out of loyalty to Slut Slutter, something Kat found hard to believe.

You see, Kat almost wants an Alfie infidelity. Had he slept once with Roxy, Alfie would have lost the moral high ground that Kat knows he holds over her; had he actually slept with Roxy over the period of time she lived in the Vic, Kat would have regained a version of that moral high ground. Part of her was hoping for that, but part of her is scared shitless at the fact that Roxy revealed that Alfie had turned her down out of love for Kat.

Why? Because Kat knows Alfie doesn't do casual sex. He establishes a friendship with the object of his affections first, he gets to know the girl as a friend, and then love develops from the friendship - the way he courted and cemented his relationship with her. Kat suspects that Alfie has feelings for Roxy, which he probably does and which is why he's invested so much of himself into the football team.

That brings us to the ludicrous Shaggerman storyline. First and foremost, treated as a mystery, we know that the only reason Kat's fucking around is for the excitement of the sexual element. There's no emotional involvement, which brings her down to the level of a guttersnipe slut. Her dress-style is even more sluttier than previously - hip-high dresses, excessive bra-and-tit exposure. A man would have to be drunk to the gills to respond to an obvious whore like that.

The fact that she suddenly becomes irresistably sexy and awe-inspiring in a matter of minutes to men with whom she'd previously had no interaction and who had no interaction with each other in any form is preposterous. The writing is cringeworthy; the acting more than dubious; the storyline utterly embarrassing.

Apart from that, no one gives a damn who Shaggerman is. The viewers do, however, give a damn about Alfie, who's the innocent party in all of this, no matter how much the writers try to present him as an ineffectual fool. 

Consider this: Max Branning is probably the most morally bankrupt character in the programme, but he owns it. Kat is equally as morally bankrupt, but doesn't hesitate to assume the moral high ground - blaming Michael for sleeping with her to Alfie's face, without assuming any soupcon of responsibility and only five minutes after telling Michael that in the course of a drunken one night stand, she fell in love with him. WTF? This is the stuff of fucking high school kids! 

Now, she's about to tell Janine that Michael had doubts about marrying her on their wedding day.

Believe me, this bitch needs karma. Her behaviour needs to be found out by her long-suffering husband. She needs to be publically exposed, humiliated and kicked from the pub to the gutter on a cold, windy and rainy night. I'm hoping Shaggerman proves to be Derek.

He's got a score to settle with Alfie and what better way to do so than by porking his slut of a wife. And Derek would be cheeky enough to admit to the assembled throng that he'd done Alfie a favour by exposing the fact that Kat is just a callous, horny whore. He would also be callous enough to step on her as she lay in the gutter after having been kicked out by Alfie.

This needs to happen, but what really needs to happen after all of this is for Kat to leave Walford. She is now a spent character. There should be no reconciliation with Alfie, no apologies, no second second chances. If Newman knows the code of Eastenders, she knows that marital cheats, once exposed, never prosper and never stay in the Square. Alfie deserves his chance with Roxy. Kat should go, as she's gone from hero to zero since her return.

Her nine lives just imploded. She should leave Walford and take the pointless Big Mo and creepy-crawly Jean with her.

The Good, The Bad and the Ugly: Review 06.08.2012

Everything I hated about Eastenders reared its ugly head tonight. The writing was whiffy, the sitcom scenes were pukeworthy and Katshit was back smelling up the place. Still, I watched it, and that says something; because there were some good things to recognise - along with bad things and ugly things as well.

Here goes.

The Good

Surprisingly, Tanya - whom I normally disdain - and Shirley. I flipping love Shirley when she's like she is in the last scene tonight. Instead of the awkward, whispery Brannings tiptoeing about Ian as if walking on eggshells, speaking about him in his presence as if he weren't there. Shirley, unexpectedly lumbered with Ian staying in the Mitchell house, and unaware of the motives behind which Phil brought him there, sits down and starts speaking normally. Of course, it's a soliloquy, but she carries on as if she's in a confessional too, speaking to Ian as if she expects him to respond. Of course, as well, she's astute enough to notice the almost imperceptible change that comes over his features when she mentions the words "Heather" and "murder."

As much as anyone might dislike the Mitchells, and there's every reason to dislike them at this moment in time, they're bloody watchable and they carry this show. I detest Ben - but then, one is supposed to detest a cold-blooded, narcissistic, self-obsessed psychopath or sociopath or whatever the hell he is. I was positively creeped out when Ben reminded Ian that although Lucy wasn't glad that he was back on the scene, Ben sure was glad to see Ian. Like hell, he was.

It was almost comical the way Phil bundled him across the Square to Chateau Mitchell solely for the purpose of keeping Ian away from any sort of medical or psychiatric help, for fear of him remembering what Ben confessed and talking. Actually, in this instance, Max was right to want Ian to seek help. He needs not only psychiatric attention, but medical attention as well for other obvious ailments which are results of living rough. The Branning household isn't the place for Ian to be and to recover, and Tanya's brainfart moment came when she refused to listen to Max because Ian being hospitalised may mean Ian being put on a mental ward.

Hello? Is she a trained shrink?

However, she had her good points today and those were when she twigged from Lauren one of the possible reasons Lucy is avoiding Ian; so off Tanya heads to the Walford Branch of the Mouth-Breathers Society.

Kudos to Tanya for perceiving that that vicious, snide and stupid little rag, bone and hank of hair has fallen under the sway of The Branning Tadpole. Lucy is one of the stupidest characters, arguably the stupidest in a gaggle of one of the most unlikeable gang of youthful characters in Eastenders' history.

I am still wanting to know how she's paying bills via cheques on Ian's business account, because she is not a signatory - so she must either be forging signatures or paying cash in hand, which is also illegal. She is so stupid that she'd shack up with a piece of beefcake she hasn't known for more than a couple of weeks and choose him over her father. She is so stupid that she doesn't realise that if she didn't have a house, with no parental authority,  businesses which afforded ready cash, that Tadpole wouldn't even sniff at her mangy, skinny, fleshless ass.

Tanya was right. This isn't about Joey, but Joey's got his oar in. He is no Dennis, no righteous hunk - only a better-looking and younger equivalent of his father. I hope it's his sweet sister who finally gets him to see exactly what he is. Not only is this doofus a bad actor, he's a dislikeable character.

As for Ian abandoning Lucy and choosing Mandy over her - and Mandy is no longer around - has that little mangy-assed bitch remembered that Ian put his own marriage to Jane on the line and lied about Lucy's abortion to his wife, after Lucy didn't have the courage or the courtesy to tell Jane she'd changed her mind about having a child for her? Ian's covered up for her poisoning most of Walford by selling fish which was rotten, he's bowed to her whims and let her half-brother back into his home, after Steven had shot Jane. He's always put Lucy first, many times to his own detriment, and this is how she repays him?

Lucy idolises her mother, the mother who abandoned Lucy for a couple of years whilst she was abroad with Peter and Steven after trying to kill Ian. She was just as foolish after a handsome man as Lucy is. She's one of several youngsters I'd love to see bugger off. And the actress is bloody awful too. Her diction is just as bad as David Witts's.

The Bad

Firstly, Lauren wrinkling her nose at Ian, saying he smelled bad. I don't imagine Lauren smelled too great after her week on the booze or whenever she'd crawl out of bed from having slept with some tosser she didn't know. Once again, another spoiled, entitled brat with no sense of compassion. Maybe a spell sleeping rough might mould some character onto her. Lauren isn't a nice person, and she's on Lucy's side. 

Rumours are abounding of the Tadpole prick porking Lauren behind Lucy's skinny back. Some friend. But at least, Lauren's now keeping her sexual activity well in the family, like the true trailer trash the Brannings are.

Poor pitiful Anthony Moon. More inconsistent writing. A few weeks ago, one was given to understand that he didn't like Alice because he found her plain and socially gauche. Alice is nice, pleasant, polite, responsible and she isn't plain at all. She deserves better than the family with whom she's been lumbered.

Tonight we were led to believe that Anthony was really scared to approach Alice - whether that was down to Derek or to his own insipidity, I don't know - but Alice does deserve better than that too. Anthony will shortly turn 26 years old. Alice is supposed to be eighteen. What is someone like that doing hanging around with someone who's only just out of school? And as for being socially gauche, Anthony acts like the imbecile.

As well, I wish Eastenders would stop trying to emulate bad sitcom scenes - those scenes at the junk shop between Anthony and Derek were just plain awful. Derek is DelBoy overdosed on steroids. Without the humour. The Moon Goons are just bad.

Kim. Not even funny. And Denise deserves better.

The Ugly

Katshit, Katshit, Katshit, Katshit.

I know TPTB are hinting Ray as the culprit - based on Katshit being surprised that Alfie had returned from his run early. Trust me, it's not Ray. But this football storyline, punctuated with Kat suddenly strutting her slut stuff with her tits half hanging out her variously-coloured bras, a fortysomething woman badly made up and dressed like a cheap whore, sexually inspiring half the men of Walford.

The football banter with the "headmistress" was bad in the extreme. Whoever thought of and agreed to write the Shaggerman Mystery should be taken out and slapped. Then sacked. It's the laughing stock of Eastenders and is actually worse than the Ferreiras' Kidneygate. Do TPTB know how supremely unpopular and how disliked Kat is now? An iconic female character has rutted herself into the viewers' collective memory as the worst sort of slut, and worse than that, a slut most viewers are begging to be axed - but only after her long-suffering and innocent husband finds out, publically humiliates her and kicks her skanky ass out on a windy, rainy night ... and she leaves Walford forever.

Anything less would cheat the viewers and would go against the Eastenders' Code, which Lorraine Newman is supposed to know.

Shaggerman isn't Ray, although much was made of him being given a key to the Vic now; it's not Jack, because we know he's going to be sniffing around a woman who outclasses Katshit in every respect. It's not Max, because Max's problems lie in Manchester. It's not Michael, and that reaction tonight was just a red herring.

Shaggerman will be Derek. If only because someone as vile as Katshit's become deserves a Toad - the sort of toad you kiss, expecting him to turn into a handsome prince, and all she'll get from her endeavours is a bad case of venereal warts.

Learn the Lingo

This is just a short piece so people posting on Digital Spy's soap forum as well as Walford Web Security Kindergarten can understand some sophisticated "euphemisms."

By mutual consent: When an actor leaves a programme "by mutual consent," it's a nice way of saying he or she's been sacked. This tag is usually applied to long-established characters who've either (a) reached their sell-by dates or (b) proven to behave too embarrassingly in the public eye to merit being sustained by the programme, itself. This tag is only applied to actors who have achieved either longevity or iconic status in a programme.

Here's a good example: Dean Gaffney's contract wasn't renewed. That's what was said at the time he was told he was surplus to requirements. Even though his character, Robbie Jackson, had been around a long time, he wasn't a major force nor was he particularly popular. However, Todd Carty was sacked at the same time, and it was announced that Carty was leaving "by mutual consent" - ostensibly, because the producers thought his character had gone as far as it could go, and the actor had no choice but to agree.

It's done, basically, to save face and the reputation of certain actors. Cast your mind back to Spring 2005, when Shane Richie announced he was leaving Eastenders. He chose not to renew his contract. However, literally on her first day back filming from an extended storyline, Jessie Wallace was told that Richie was leaving at Christmas and, therefore, her character would be going with him. Quite succinctly, Kat couldn't be sustained as a viable character with no Alfie. So, it was announced that Wallace was leaving "by mutual consent."

Taking a break: This is the current idiomatic expression which means that an actor has chosen not to renew his contract. In short, he's leaving. It's this phrase that denotes the programme is in panic mode and wants to hide the fact should many important actors playing established characters want to fly the coop. First employed, ironically, when Letitia Dean chose to leave she show in 2006, following on the important heels of Leslie Grantham (who left "by mutual consent"), Shane Richie, Jessie Wallace and Tracey-Ann Oberman in order to avoid mass panic amongst the tabloid press. It was announced that Dean was "taking a break" from Eastenders. It was never announced that the break would last six years!

Consequently, when it was announced that Samantha Womack was "taking a break" at the end of the babyswap storyline, culminating in Ronnie's imprisonment for three years. This doesn't mean that Womack will necessarily return at the end of that period, or even before. It's down to the Executive Producer to decide if it's realistic enough or viable enough for Ronnie to return, and then, Womack has to want to do so. She had a life before EastEnders and is having a successful professional life afterward. Birkwood employed this phrase rather than admit that the actress felt this storyline was a step too far and left for her own emotional and professional health.

They've used the same bunker tactic in describing Jo Joyner's departure as her "taking a break." It's a euphemism. She decided not to renew her contract. In employment terms, that means she's gone. When you decide not to sign a new contract of employment offered you by your employer, you aren't "taking a break," you're planning on leaving.

Get a grip.

And, by the way ... message to Sey of Walford Web ... Biffo and Blossom are one person and he is a troll.

Saint Tanya and Headuparseitis

The eponymous Digital Spy and Walford Web forum member the joy of pat is proving either to be a contrarian or an attention-seeker, in her challenge to defend the honour of Saint Tanya.

Since she first appeared in 2006, Tanya has existed almost completely as a female appendage to some man of action. She is the rife characterisation of the proverbial limp biscuit. Many people saw her, from the beginning, as the pretty and put-upon wife of a serial adulterer, mother to his children. It failed to register with many people that Tanya was Max's second wife and that Max's son from his first marriage was a testament to what happened during that first marriage.

Here's as much of Tanya's backstory that we were allowed from the period of her introduction (2006) until the Stax reveal. It's not made up; if you look hard enough on YouTube, you'll find it's all referenced in various episodes.

- Tanya was a teenaged hair-dresser when she met and began an affair with Max. Yes, at first she didn't know he was married, but once she did, it didn't stop her in her pursuit. Max referenced this in the episode where he told Tanya about Jim having feigned burying him alive. Yes, yes, yes, Max was the cheater here and was in a committed relationship with his wife Rachel and a father to a young son. People in marriages shouldn't cheat and are guiltier than those with whom they cheat if the cheating partner isn't married; however, it remains a more of society that women (or men, for that matter) who pursue someone in a relationship simply because they want that person for themselves and give no thought to breaking up a home or a family are just as bad, morally, as the adulterer.

- Tanya got up the duff by Max, who was married, and held out for marriage, herself. When Max left Rachel for Tanya, Tanya made Max promise that he would always put her children first. Again, Max referenced this in that selfsame episode listed above, and Tanya didn't dispute it.

- Tanya wasn't a sweet innocent to be corrupted when she bagged Max either. She had been promiscuous, free on taking drugs and drinking since she was in her early teens. She'd often come into work, having spent all night drinking, gorging on polomints to mask her drunk breath. She told Stacey this on the boozy afternoon they spent together in 2007, prior to the Stax reveal.

- She was from a sink estate and had a (then older, subsequently younger) sister, whom she introduced to a life of sex,drugs, drink and rock'n roll before abandoning her in the mire to pretend to be a respectable middle-class matron. That was referenced when Rainie first appeared in 2007.

So Tanya was basically a snob, trying to hide her real roots and social climb. She looked down at everyone in Walford. Who can forget the way she'd walk through the market with her nose wrinkled by an imaginary bad smell. In actual fact, she came froma strata of society marginally lower than anyone working on the market or even living in Walford at that time.

When Bradley and Stacey were planning their first wedding, she objected to Rachel's presence, even though Rachel was, really, the mother of the groom. Rachel proved prescient in warning her that one day Tanya would be Rachel, and Tanya would be outdone by an 18 year-old slapper. Tanya still refuses to see or acknowledge that Stacey did to her marriage, exactly what she did to Rachel/s - even after Max showed willing on Christmas Day 2010 to abandon everything - children, home, relationship with Vanessa, to run off and worship at the altar of Saint Stacey Slater.

- Everything Tanya has achieved, she's achieved through a relationship with a man. Max bought her her first business, and Greg did the same. When she quite rightly kicked Max out of the house in the wake of Stax, rather than concentrate on making her business a success and putting her children's interests first, she prostituted herself to the local psycho, sleeping with him to get him onside for a plot to kill Max - a plot she thought to land him in whilst she swanned off to the sun. After she reneged on that insipidity, after Max agreed to go away and give her time to think about their relationship and where she wanted it to go, she bunked down and slept with Jack, brought him into the family as the pater familias, even planned to bunk off to France with him, taking Max's children (thus, breaking the law), simply because she believed she was entitled to do this.

Let's mention that she tried to bury her husband alive and covered for her daughter when she tried to kill Max.

Really, that first little escapade should be made public knowledge, even though every time Max alludes, jokingly, to it, Tanya looks as though she's about to shit herself.

She left Max a second time because she'd spent him dry on whatever money he had. Instead of standing by her man, she left and within three months, she'd got a younger, richer and stupider model - Gormless Greg - who got her a house in the Square and repurchased the Salon for her, after she'd committed a big crime in robbing Roxy blind.

During her association with Greg, she revelled in making Jane feel bad about her crumbling relationship with Ian and made countless snide remarks about Vanessa. After marrying Greg, she immediately began an affair with Max. Who can forget that infamous scene of them lolling on the bed, laughing at "Bob-the-Builder" babysitting their son.

As much as Lauren is a budding alcoholic, her mother has alcohol issues, herself, learned from her own mother. Tanya drinks to celebrate, she drinks to commiserate. She drinks when she's alone, she drinks when she's in company. She drinks when she's bored, when she's sad; in fact, she's rarely without an oversized wineglass in her hand.

She's selfish and an abysmal parent. She tries to be more of a friend to her daughters, to the point that she undermines any responsible effort made by Max in parenting. When Lauren stole Max's credit card to buy a camcorder for 300 quid, Max ended up, prompted by Tanya, apologising to Lauren. When Max confined a drunken Lauren to her room, Tanya let her go out and about because "she needed air." When Abi actually asked if Tanya would give her consent to Abi's underaged marriage to Jay, Tanya's remark was she guessed she'd have to do so, if that's what Abi wanted. Wimp. Epic wimp.

Her proper backstory wasn't explored until MamaLag Cora showed up last year, and that didn't come about until she caught her cancer cold - a plot device which served only to try to make Tanya likeable again after showing her up as a bitch just as amoral as Max and with no moral high ground. Even the story about her helping her father to commit suicide was totally unrealistic, considering that diomorphine is administered only by a medical professional to terminally ill cancer patients, and it's not left within the reach of a thirteen year-old girl. Google diomorphine if you want to know what it is.

Everything that happens around Tanya, Tanya makes about Tanya. She even managed to make bringing a despondent and derelect Ian Beale back to so-called civilisation all about her wedding last week. The week before, the fact that her mother had had an illegitimate child years before she, herself, was born, became all about how this affected Tanya.

Tanya isn't a likeable or admirable character. She's one of the shallowest, most narcissistic and most selfish of any female character, with the possible exception of Kat.

It's a shame the show doesn't do a storyline about an epidemic of terminal headuparseitis in Walford. That would kill off Tanya and Kat pretty damned quick.