Groundhog Week - Review 03.07.-04.07.2014

Yes, folks, forget about Groundhog Day, this was Groundhog Week, or Haven't We Been Here Before?

The Ballad of Roxy and Aleks

Well, Bonnie and Clyde, they're not ...

Roxy must have the worst judgement in picking men in the history of the show. Roxy is one of my favourite characters, besides possessing traits that annoy the hell out of me. She's an abysmal mother, who relies on her daughter surviving on the disciplary and care-giving skills of the relatives who surround her, even if one of those relatives is a murderer and a psychopath. Poor Amy drew the short straw in parenthood with Amy and Jack. Her mother can't quite get over the fact that she's the wrong side of thirty, and she would rather party down with the latest boyfriend than act the responsible mum with her daughter. She's selfish. That said, Roxy is warm, kind, big-hearted, and loyal, but high-maintenanced. If Nikki Spraggan were sticking around (and I'm gutted that she isn't), she and Roxy would make an excellent friendship, but then - as we know - Roxy doesn't do friendships outside of Mitchelldom.

The worst-kept secret in all of this mediocre week was the fact that Aleks was married. Not just married, but married and with a child in Latvia.

That was bad enough for Roxy, who has a penchant for being attracted to the wrong man - her sister's boyfriend, the local bully, a psychopath, someone still in love with his wife - you get my drift; but worse was the fact that the news had to come to her - by way of Tamwar - from Alfie, her husband of about five minutes.

Rita Simons and Kristian Kiehling have great chemistry, and I love the fact that Roxy's being given a storyline at last - albeit, it doesn't seem that she gets any sort of real storylines whenever her Sugly Blister is around. I like Roxy and Aleks, but I have a feeling that this is just another Roxy cock-up from which SuperSis will rescue her, waving an expensively manicured admonitory finger in her face, reminding her that only Ronnie can run her life effectively.

One of the best things about Rita Simons when she first joined the cast were her excellent one-liners and her subtly muggish facial expressions. We had some of these on show in Thursday's hour-long episode, when she invited Aleks around for her revenge specialty - curry laced with laxative. Her face, as she pulled away from Aleks's embrace was a picture of disgust and later ...

Aleks: This is good. Really, really good. I'm serious, you should cook more often.
Roxy (deadpan): Really? Is it as good as Anita's?

Friday's episode found Roxy re-discovering her idiotic Mitchell mojo - when someone annoys the Mitchells, that person simply has to leave town.

It's as if the Mitchells aren't mature enough to support anyone who's hurt or insulted their massive ego hanging around reminding them of their frailty. So what does Roxy do?

She buys Aleks a one-way ticket back to Latvia - for his daughter's sake, you understand.

That's right - ne'mind the man has a job with responsibilities, a flat with rent to pay, ne'mind he's working here to provide a better life for his child - he simply has to go. Now. Tonight.

Friday's episode was a weak one, but it provided a good balance between the older female characters in the programme and their younger counterparts. In this instance, the slightly tipsy Cora - she whose daughter was a teenage marriage-wrecker, herself - had a sound piece of advice for Roxy.

So what if he is married?

I agree with her, however; Roxy and Aleks were good together, and I suppose she meant Aleks could divorce his wife, but we learned at the end that, whilst Aleks is perfectly happy to retain what he has with Roxy, he won't divorce his wife. In fact, he absolutely refuses. He thinks his child will hate him if he does that, but I wonder how much it does have to do with religion? If he's from the Eastern part of Latvia, he's from the Catholic region. So Roxy, effectively, becomes his bit on the side.

How long before the wife and child show up?

Simply (in the) Red Again.

Guess who's taken out a loan again?

Liam, I done somefink really stupid.

That's right. Bianca's in the red again to the tune of 3 grand,and she can't even afford the first instalment, which has led to copious letters and a pony-tailed bailiff turning up at the door.

As vile as she can be sometimes, I realised that I'm going to miss Bianca, and I wish she were staying far more than the po-faced, morally self-righteous and judgemental Sonia, who irks the hell out of me. Natalie Cassidy has two stock expressions as her party pieces - the sad tragic one and the indignant one, and both look as though she's constipated and in need of Roxy's remedy for Aleks's lies.

Since Patsy Palmer's departure was announced, TPTB have gone into full Paulinisation of her character, making her as feckless and unlikeable as they could. I'm not au fait with benefits, but surely the Butcher-Jacksons, especially Carol, would have qualified for assistance, especially with payment of utility bills and the like. Bianca's not the brightest lightbulb in the pack, but she's far more likeable than the abysmal Tina. Bianca tries to do what's right, but - as she said this evening - she couldn't manage on her own in the wake of David leaving and, literally, taking Janine's blood money - which begs the question: has anyone contacted Janine? I know Carol was more than a bit of a bitch to her after and during the trial, but Janine wouldn't see her nieces and nephews suffer. 

I couldn't help noticing, again, what an abject child Bianca was, when she was crying to Terry about the bailiffs ...

They'll come and take the telly and all.

IIRC, it was a loan to get a new television that got Bianca in trouble the last time. The number of childish and child-like adults on this show increases by leaps and bounds - Bianca, Tina, Shirley, Linda.

Tina's childishness is deliberate, however. She uses it to her advantage. A more dishonest, lying, feckless and irresponsible character I've never seen. I'm sorry Carol's felt desperate enough to take the route of pushing cannibis and going in with this piece of human detritis and her equally vile Aunt Babe. Give me Big Mo's casual dodginess any day instead of Babe. Ian was desperate enough to meet her wage demands and take her back into employment, but I wonder how he'll feel when she's caught dealing behind the bar of the cafe and his business is shut down. I hate this character. I want her to go. And take Sonia with her.

Ian's dynamic with Carol has changed since David's departure. Carol would be too proud to ask for help, but he is Bianca's uncle, and she should feel that she could approach him to inform him of the family's circumstances in the wake of David's departure.

Highlights from Thursday: The Carol-Dot scene. There aren't enough scenes between these two actresses. Dot referenced having cancer before meeting Jim. I know that, about a decade ago, she lost a kidney to cancer, but she was married to Jim then. I do think that in the early 90s, prior to her first departure, she had intra-uterine pre-cancerous cells and may have had a hysterectomy. But I thought the exchange between Dot and Carol poignant and very well-enacted and written.

Low Points from Thursday: Sonia mouthing off to Bianca. Sonia comes around the Butcher-Jacksons with cakes and moral platitudes, but I recall a time when Carol subtly broached the subject of finances, and Sonia launched into a litany of her mortgage, Rebecca yadda-yadda. No one's expecting her to pay Bianca's way, but when David left them high and dry, the most Sonia could do was cover Carol's shifts at the cafe, and that came to an end pretty sharpish. The odd twenty quid here and there left with Carol might not have gone amiss, especially since Carol looked after Rebecca whilst Sonia was off getting drunk with Tina the lout.

Whitney - that's it, Whitney. You do your part by bunking off work and helping Bianca on the stall, especially with Aleks on the warpath about unregistered people working as casuals on the stall. Put your real job in jeopardy. And did I hear rightly when Whitney offered whatever money she offered to help with the debt - I live here too? Does she not pay room and board? She's working full-time, the family is on the breadline, and she doesn't contribute, at least, to housekeeping?

Just a couple of points about Friday's episode which seem to be in contention - Carol is not going to deal drugs for the retarded Court Jester and that foul piece of obese flesh known as Auntie Babe. I don't know how people read ambiguity into the fact that Carol said no to Tina's offer and her decision to have a double, rather than a single mastectomy.

The whole bone of contention between Sonia and Bianca was about whether Carol should have the lesser surgery, meaning a quicker recuperation period (meaning Carol would be at work sooner) or the full whack, meaning a longer convalescence and more thorough physiotherapy.

Carol initially wanted the lesser of the two, thinking she could help her family out financially, even though everyone from Dot to Cora to Big Mo were telling her it was better to do the double and have a better chance at being cancer-free. Finally, it was Pam Coker, who got through to her.

And that's my second point. A lot of people thought Pam's final approach to Carol, the scene on the bench, was agressive and intrusive. I thought it was anything but. Pam thought she'd offended Carol previously at the community centre,and her first remit was to apologise. Her conversation with Carol assured Carol that she knew what it was like to be afraid to do something, but to face that fear and go on living with hope.

In the end, all we have is hope.

Then she gave Carol a slight hug and a motherly kiss on the cheek. Sometimes, the kindness of strangers can help someone see something in perspective. Carol is the prickliest of people. Had she been offended by Pam's proximity, she would not have hesitated in telling her. She didn't. Instead, she listend and took on board what Pam had to say.

Others are grasping at straws, saying this is a nod to Les being the Mad Undertaker who killed Lucy Beale out of greed. That's too silly to warrant comment.

Something for Everyone - Review 30.06.2014

"Something for everyone" ... sound familiar? It should, fanbois. This was one of many mantras chanted by Dominic Treadwell-Collins, as he sought to con convince viewers that he was the man to bring EastEnders back to the glory it once knew.

Yes, there certainly has been something for everyone - Billy got a couple of episodes where he got Janet back, and next week he'll get a couple more when it's discovered he's stealing electricity from Aleks.

But we all know (because we've been told) that the storylines to which we should all pay homage are - Lucy's murder, the Carters, Carol's cancer, the Carters,  and Shirley's secret and anything else about the Carters Dom-Dom De Luxe throws in the fray. Everything else is transient and temporary, and that includes the crumbs thrown Sharon from the High Table of Shirley Queen of Scrotes. Sharon's storyline is all about Shirley.

Oh, and blackmail is the new black. Raine's blackmailing Ian, Phil's blackmailing Shirley, who's blackmailing him, Alfie is going to blackmail Aleks, and Dean will probably blackmail Linda.

Over-egging. This was always a fault of this wee pixie of a man, who has an enormous ego. Babies and over-egging. 

Pun intended.

Two Cons Don't Make a Man.

A very astute viewer of this programme remarked about this episode that it was very much done to justify the continued presence of Shane Richie in the programme. After watching it, I agree. It was also the chance to give Himesh Patel something more to do other than shuffle about in a coat two sizes too small, judging by the shortened lengths of the sleeves.

I feel sorry for Richie, because he's a much much better actor than either the writing room or Dom-Dom give him credit. In fact, he's one of the strongest actors in the show. It's just that, whilst the writers bothered with redeeming Kat's character, they were too lazy to research Alfie again, and, instead, re-wrote him as an even more obnoxious Shane Richie. Besides, since January, why bother writing for Alfie Moon, when Alfie's original persona has been usurped by the man-boobed landlord of the Vic, the simian-browed Mick Carter.

Alfie has become just another loser, dominated by a stringent wife. And - surprise surprise - he's got money problems.

Repetition for emphasis. 

Billy has always had money problems - hence, the resort to stealing from everyone. Bianca is now hiding significant finanacial woes. Again. And here's Alfie worrying about how he's going to feed Tommy and the twins.

Over-egging again, especially since it's been disclosed that Alfie will struggle financially after the twins' births.

Alfie and Carol, who will suffer financial hardship, herself, are the new Biancas.

Let's cut to the chase - the moment an EP starts lumbering various characters with storyline after storyline of financial hardship coupled with bungled money-making schemes, it's time for the actor to call time and go. It means that TPTB have no more ideas for these sorts of characters, and don't value them. Wallace and Richie are both pursuing different venues outside the show; maybe they should just leave so Dom-Dom De Luxe can invent some more Carters.

Several well-off and entitled Millennials, supported and sustained by doting parents, think stories of poverty and financial hardship are boring and only affect weaker characters. My advice to them is that they fuck off and read some appalling Ayn Rand, if they can understand her selfish logic, and please don't vote Labour at the next election. In fact, don't even vote Tory. Mark the ballot for UKIP.

I know history isn't important to these people, but some of the most powerful storylines the show has done in the past have revolved around financial hardship and involved anything but weak characters.

- Arthur's mental breakdown and theft of the Christmas Club money to fund his daughter's wedding
- Frank's breakdown where he simply walked off and left Pat destitute
- Ian Beale's bankruptcy, resulting in that classic scene of him on his knees in the street begging Phil Mitchell for money

Powerful storylines. Powerful characters. Powerful thing, history.

A couple of interesting inconsistencies in this storyline - first, if Alfie got in trouble for having Terry, an unregistered trader, helping on his stall, why is it OK that Big Mo is doing the same for Bianca and Kat? Second, November 2013 was, according to Roxy, "a long time ago."

Wow, Millennial EastEnders! Dom Dom De Luxe certainly knows his audience of fanbois.

The ice cream story was stupid, basically a stupid set-up for Alfie (and jobsworth Tamwar) to discover a lever by which - surprise! - Alfie can blackmail Alex. He's married.

Cue the duff-duff.

Gob on You.

Really, that's what I want to do to Ian and Peter. There's a verse from the old Not the Nine O'Clock News song that particularly applies to Peter:-

Sex is boring
Pain is fun
I want to cut my fingers off
One by one
There ain't no point
In being alive
I want to be dead
But I'm twenty-five

First Ian spends weeks on end, blubbing and crying, fucking or cuddling various inappropriate women; now Peter vegetates on the couch at Billy's squat all day long, put out of commission because his "amazing" sister comes to him in his dreams.

Stop. Just stop. Lucy's death was shocking, but people have moved on. In fact, though they'd rather not say it to your face, your daughter and sister was a rancid-eating little self-obsessed bitch. She wasn't nice, not even to the pair of you. She hated Ian and disdained Peter.

The character study surrounding Lucy's death has cropped up Ian and Peter as a pair of First Class farts. Ian's a perv who frequents kerb-crawling, and you needn't think this is some new phenomenon. Ian has frequented prostitutes since he was a young man, some twenty years ago. Peter, on the other hand, has emerged as an entitled, socially gauche, Class A Sloane Ranger prat. 

The dialogue between these two was cringeworthingly embarrassing.

We'll get through this together.

Who says that? Far more realistic would be for Ian to tell Peter to get up off his lazy arse and get to work. No, instead, they make lunch together as a bonding exercise. In Billy's house. All the time the fanbois, the cheerleaders and the Executive Producer were treated to a gratuitous shot of Ben Hardy's workout-enhanced arms.

CarterVille.

Even when she isn't there, Shirley is the focal point of a formerly charming family, whose characters are rapidly wearing thin.

Monday saw everyone, Linda inexplicably and unexpectedly worried about Shirley's absence.

The best part of this family is Nancy, of whom we don't see enough; but Linda is, arguably, the most nuanced character ever to appear in the programme. She's struggling to accept her youngest son's sexuality to the extent that she can't even say the event he attended during the weekend - Gay Pride.

Knowing what I now know about Linda's background and about the secret that's about to be revealed, I can understand the veneer of immaturity that envelopes Linda. She hasn't progressed past the age of fifteen, the age where she was asked to put away childish things and become a mother - in other words, a responsible adult.

But she isn't a responsible adult. Oh, she's a mum and a caring and loving one, but she's the eternal child, made over and mollycoddled by Mick and her children. She doesn't cook, she dresses like a teenager, she's frightened of clowns and she takes a childish delight in birthdays. Many times, her delightful and down-to-earth daughter takes the lead in curbing her OTT personality.

Dean is definitely interested.

On the other hand, there's feckless Tina, who I now am convinced is a retarded Court Jester. That said, Ian's immediate sacking of her was not only harsh, but illegal. I'd like to see Dom Dom try to sack someone like that - his bony arse would be at Tribunal quicker than he could say "Mitchell."

Tina's sacked and doesn't know what to do. When her younger brother suggests telling Tosh the truth, Tina decides to deal some drugs with Auntie Babe.

I've Done Somefink REALLY Stupid.

Change the record. Bianca's in debt. Again. And this time the bailiffs are coming.

Crap episode.

The Return of the Native (Troll)

I see the same old same old trout is back pouting and spouting on Digital Spy forum ...

Yes, happy campers, Vald is back in town. Just as irrelevant and just as pathetically annoying in her attempts to be. Glad to see some perspicacious forum members have the measure of this troll and are taking her down.

Shirley Queen of Scrotes Week:- 23.05-27.06.2014

Apologies for another weekly summary. The weather's still nice, the World Cup is still on (some of us have teams who are still in the competition), and the son is home beginning a year-long internship in the UK, so blogs have taken a backseat for awhile.

Anyway, for the second week running, we've had a gaggle of good episodes. Whereas last week featured Sharon, or rather DTC's muse of scrotes, Shirley acting out, this week featured her even more, and she should be having an epiphany about Phil, but her wrinkled, old booze-flattened, cigarette-stinking skin is too thick and her entitlement is too great for her to even fathom that.

Secrets and Lies: The Ice Queen Goeth.

For the record, pregnant or not, I still think Ronnie killed Lucy. I still think Not-Charlie Cotton had something to do with it as well. 

Let me also say, as well, that, since the Carters figured heavily in this week's episodes, I've never seen a more immature lot of adults in my life. The Mitchells are certainly dysfunctional, as are the Beales and the Brannings; but the Carters occupy an unusual situation, wherein the children of the family are, at times, more mature than their adult counterparts. There's a reason for this.

Shirley is certainly exemplary of such puerility. Her reaction to Phil's engagement to Sharon is to get stonking drunk, spend a night on a bench and then whine pathetically to - of all people - Roxy and Ronnie, the Retcon Sisters.

In fact, Ronnie ...

... goes so far to comfort Shirley by remarking that she'd always thought Shirley and Phil would end up together.

Really, Roswell?

Of course, Ronnie would think that Shirley was "the one" for Phil, for obvious reasons, and that remark and it's non-history (for lack of a better term) was the only niggle of this episode. Why? Because Ronnie Retcon would only have known Phil in a relationship with Shirley, but then before anyone starts jumping up and down about the use of the word retcon, the Mitchell sisters are. For years, prior to 2007, it was an established fact that Eric, Phil's father, had one brother, Clive. There was no mention ever of another brother or any cousins, other than Billy, whose father was Eric's first cousin. Billy bears the same relation to Phil that Michael Moon bore to Alfie.

Then, suddenly, we're presented with two Mitchell sisters, daughters of a Mitchell uncle, Archie, of whom we'd never heard, arrive at a non-wedding where they're not immediately recognised at all. They made, from time to time, vague references to incidences that happened when they were small children and the Bruvs were ages older, but they don't seem to be familiar any of the Mitchell lore that would have been common knowledge in a family like that -such as Sharongate. That was and certainly would have been big potatoes amongst the Mitchells.

Ronnie thought Shirley suited Phil the best? She may not have approved of Sharon because of the Sharongate saga, but surely she knows about Kathy? Kate?

Besides, how can she surmise that Shirley and Phil were the ultimate couple when Shirley encouraged and brought out the absolute worst in Phil? But then, Ronnie, at this point, is beyond redemption, herself.

However, in the course of this grand whine of poor pitiful Shirley's, she accidentally on purpose lets drop to Ronnie that Phil doesn't love Sharon. No, he doesn't, reckons Shirley. Shirley is absolutely certain that Phil doesn't love Sharon. In fact, he's only marrying her because he feels sorry for her ... because Phil organised the thugs to go into The Albert and beat Sharon up.

Well, no, actually, he didn't. But what's the truth to a scrote like Shirley? What Phil did was what the Mitchells always do. They organise a bit of terror tactic, with someone on hand to save the day, and then it goes wrong. The thugs were meant to scare Sharon and she was meant to be rescued by the bouncers she'd sent home. Phil never intended for Sharon to be physically hurt; things just got out of hand. It goes without saying, however, that what he meant to do originally, is just as despicable and psychologically intimidating.

Kudos to Ronnie for later pointing that out to Phil, that his male ego, his Mitchell ego was so much that he had to reduce an independent woman to a blubbing, gibbering wreck. Phil has known Sharon for twenty years. He should know her better, and for all scrote-faced Shirley boasts about knowing Phil better than anyone after a mere seven years of skulking around in his shadow, encouraging him to do bad, she should know better as well.

So now the headcount of who knows Phil's secret stands at Phil, Shirley and Ronnie. I'll bet, after she banged on his door, with Sharon upstairs, shoutiing the odds, that Phil regrets ever confiding in her.

Of couse, all this action in Monday's episode was played out against the revelation that Ronnie Retcon is pregnant. Again.

The fanbois are creaming their briefs over this one, jumping up and down agog and insisting that Ronnie is going to get a happy ending, with the baby she wants and with Charlie Cotton.

Guys, grow up. And get some balls. Seriously.

Ronnie is a psychopath. She's killed a man. She's probably killed Lucy. With the gun she so conveniently left at Phil's. Of course, she didn't shoot Lucy. There's more than one way you can kill with a gun. And Charlie Cotton isn't Charlie Cotton. In fact, we don't know who he is. But she is not going to get a happy ending, not by a long shot. In fact, I've revised my opinion that Ronnie might die. Having her die in childbirth would be one massive cop-out. She's killed a man, and if she killed Lucy, she'll be locked up for life - not five years or five months. This will be the storyline to illustrate the current law that's in force for murderers where life does actually mean life. So Ronnie probably will have a baby, but won't be able to be with that child because she'll be in prison.

And by the way, fanbois, it is possible to have sex, conceive a child and kill a person all in a night's work. I never knew there were so many virgins, especially male fanboi virgins, in the whole of the UK who now reckon that just because Ronnie and Charlie copulated on Good Friday, releases her as a suspect in Lucy's death. It doesn't. Her lack of presence enhances the suspicion.

Now stop wanking and go find a boy or girl to help you pop that cherry.

There were certainly a plethora of home truths tonight, none the least being that neither Phil nor Ronnie know what love is. I've no doubt that Phil loves Sharon, but he knows that Sharon not only knows his history, she's a part of it. She was the one he blamed, conveniently, for Sharongate. He stood by whilst his brother called her a whore, offered her about to his friends; he would be aware that Sharon knows the Mitchell form for proving a point and for insisting that they be the centre of the universe for every woman with whom they have a relationship. Sooner or later, Sharon's going to suss what Phil did, and it may not take Shirley to tell her. He also knows, deep down, that whilst he may love her, Sharon isn't in love with him. She's fond of him, but just let Grant pay a visit to Walford, and we'll see whom Sharon really loves.

The Mitchells really are toxic, especially so, without Peggy about to anchor them, and I was glad Phil refused to let Ronnie take the moral high ground, because she's done far worse, in cold-blooded murder, than Phil. Really, both of them need a comeuppance.

And please don't delude yourself about Ronnie's departure. She's not gone for good - in fact, she'll be back at the end of the summer, when the actress has finished filming Pleasant Valley. Ronnie just can't keep away from her control fetish and sexual obsession - Roxy - so she'll come back. What you saw on Monday was a psychopath losing her all-important control and retreating in order to regain it.

As for Shirley, how self-obsessed and pathetic! Who is she to know whom Phil loves and whom he doesn't? She's basing a lot of her assumptions on kindness and concern that he showed her after her declaration of love. She thinks that no one would put someone they love in harm's way the way Phil did Sharon? Then she doesn't know the Mitchells. No one loved Sharon more than Grant, yet he almost had her burned alive. Shirley loves the power Phil gives her by validating her as an important person in Walford. Without Phil, Shirley's just a drunk on a bench. Dean certainly knows. The best scene by far tonight was when Phil turned the tables on the old scrote and gave her a taste of her own blackmailing methods. She's got the secret about Phil and the Albert, but Phil knows that Mick is her son. And Sharon knows about Phil's and Shirley's involvement in covering Ronnie's murderous tracks.

Poor, self-pitying Shirl! Hits the bottle when things don't go her way. What a vile and disgusting character.

So Phil turns tricks on Shirley and demands her repayment of his loan of 10K or else, he'll tell her perfect Mick the truth about himself. Good to know that Shirl can dish it out, but she can't take it.

As for Sharon finding the gun, the woman is thinking.

Mr Pleasant, AKA Mick Carter.

Notice the coldness that now exists between Mick and Linda, as well as Mick's ill-concealed jealousy of Dean? Johnny's failed some of his exams. Are we surprised? Linda is quick to blame his tutors and everything else, but in the end, Johnny's right. He's only got himself to blame. He seemed to be spending a lot of hours working at the Vic, socialising with the local youngsters, having illegal parties at the Albert etc, and we rarely saw him studying or even referencing uni. This is pretty realistic, I would think. I hope he does re-sits and carries on, because further education doesn't sit high on EastEnders' scale of things. At least, not since Michelle Fowler got her degree.

It seems that everyone is taking an emotional punch at Linda, who can do nothing right - whether it's pampering her children or masking her disappointment that her child failed his exams. Mick is treating her now like a bastard at a family reunion, but Dean is very subtle in being nice to her.

Johnny, himself, annoyed me to no end in this episode, because as much as he might bleat on about wanting to grow up, when it suits him, he wants to be babied and mollycoddled by his mother. After all, Johnny readily admitted that he didn't go into halls his first year, because he wanted to live with his parents. In fact, for a university student, he spends curiously little time at uni. He doesn't participate in any fora or activities there, he has no friends. All his studying is done in the upstairs kitchen or at the bar or in the pub, itself. Are we suprised that he failed? Does he miss his parents so much he couldn't avail himself of the university library?

One final comment before I move to Tuesday's episode: Without a shadow of a doubt, Phil refused to take the gun Ronnie had. There's an ongoing discussion about this, wherein one participant refuses to yield to the obvious and admit a proven fact: Phil Mitchell does not want that gun in his house.

Phil refused the gun. Ronnie wanted him to throw it in the canal,and he refused. He told her to take the cash, and indicated that she should "take that with you", meaning the gun. Then Dennis came in and Phil took him upstairs to see Sharon, at which point Ronnie left the gun in the bag on the chair at the table.

There is no way Phil would have left the house, knowing a gun was left where it was, in a bag at the kitchen table. A child was in the house. Had Phil agreed to keep that gun, he'd have taken it from Ronnie, concealed it from Dennis and put it in the wall safe he has in the house. What if, instead of Sharon, Dennis had come to the kitchen and found that?

Ronnie's reckoning behind having the gun was as protection against the Whites. But Ronnie's as big a liar as Phil. If the Whites are her major concern, then Phil would doubly want nothing to do with a gun that's obviously illegal. Ronnie left that gun at Phil's, unbeknownst to Phil, for the same reason she left Carl White's phone there. Interesting that Sharon should find them both. 

That gun is the weapon with which Ronnie killed Lucy Beale.

Robbing Peter to Pay Paul.

Once again, a Shirley-centric episode, with her at her worst, achieving the nadir by actually stealing from her son. That's right, she stole from Dean - or attempted to do so - in order to protect her perfect Mick.

Shirl could blackmail with the best of them, especially when it comes to blackmailing Phil.

I wonder if she regrets not shopping him to the police for perverting the course of justice when he was harbouring Ben, in the wake of that reveal. It's interesting to see Shirley get a taste of her medicine, for all she reckoned Phil loved her and wouldn't put her through the same trauma as Sharon. Guess again. Don't ever forget, Shirley, that this is the man who said he could never be faithful to you.

Shirley is such a self-pitying coward. It's foolish to think of her now as a strong or even a brave woman. She's a bully (and most of them are cowards) and she's a drunk. It's actually got to the point now where her Court Jester of a sister is imploring her not to be drunk.

Once again, she betrays Dean. Dean was the only one of her children seven years ago, who actually attempted to bond with her, to call her "mum" and want to love her as a son loves a mother, and time and again, she binned him off - for a Polish builder, for Heather, for whatever. The scene at the Salon where Shirley told Dean how proud she was of him was poignant and honest, and both Linda Henry and Matt di Angelo played blinders there. This was a chance for them to bond again, but the moment she clocked the dosh he put into the cashbox, you knew what she was going to do.

Shirley has a miniscule share in the pub, but she must take a wage, and I'll bet Mick doesn't pay her minimum wage as her name's above the door. She pays no rent, and doesn't contribute to the upkeep of housekeeping, she isn't responsible for overheads at the pub, she has no car. I can only assume that the bulk of her earnings goes on fags and booze. A grand isn't small change, but it's not impossible to get. Still, it's good to know that Shirley now realises that Phil treats every woman he's with or been with equally - like shit.

And now Dean knows that the only way his business got off the ground was via a loan fronted by Phil Mitchell.

Every Good Boy Deserves Favour.

Lies, lies and more lies. Tina is one of the most feckless and irresponsible people I've seen in the show. The way she shirks responsibility is alarming. Run, Tosh! It's no surprise when Tina says her daughter despises her. I'd despise her too. She lies to Ian about doing a shift at the cafe because it's more fun "helping" Dean serve drinks at his opening. Then she lies to her partner about having asked Ian for a rise, right when Ian walks into the pub and sees her there. Yes, run, Tosh. Surely, Tosh must know now that Tina is dishonest and will lie at the drop of a hat. After all, if you don't have honesty in a marriage, says Linda Carter ....

Speaking of whom, Linda went too far, and so did Johnny. Actually, you actually hear of parents approaching their children's tutors after bad exam results. Johnny admitted yesterday that his failures were down to himself. Actually, how anyone can revise or do academic work in that environment is beyond me - sitting in the kitchen with all the distracting hubbub and his mother gazing intently over him. Then he moves to the bar and the actual body of the pub, itself. He must have amazing levels of concentration to blank out all the distraction around him, but obviously, he didn't because he failed a couple of modules. But Linda's ethos is based on ignorance and fear; she summed herself and her type up precisely when she told the tutor that I might not be educated but I ain't stupid. That's belligerance in the face of knowledge and knowledge is power. Maybe that, coupled with the fact that Johnny was a premature baby, is the reason Linda wants to keep her youngest in a puerile and childish mode, when it's really she who sometimes acts the child.

Linda was a child when she married and a child when she had all three of her children. She's never known a real adolescence. She's gone from child to wife with nothing inbetween. Her children are now more mature, in many ways, than she. I was pleased that Mick stopped Johnny when he went too far by referring to his mother to her face as "that stupid bitch." Out of order. Well out of order. Yet, even after coming out, Johnny told people like Whitney and Nancy that he liked living with his parents and was close to his mum. Ironic that, when Nancy ordered him two drinks at Dean's opening, he tagged her an enabler, when it's been convenient for him to enable his mother's behaviour.

Still, this has established Linda's insecurities even moreso.

And speaking of insecurities, the penny's dropping with Sharon too now. She's clocked Phil in a lie about that gun, after Phil having promised honesty to her months ago. If he lied to her about this gun, I'll bet her memory's kicking in and she's beginning to wonder if the attack on The Albert was really coincidental. Whatever is running through her mind in that final scene, it wasn't about using the gun for protection. The gun will get used. It will get fired, but not in the way any of us thinks.

She Dreamed a Dream (That's about to Become a Nightmare)

Sharon Marshall always gives her best. In Friday's episode, we further learned that Stan wasn't the ogre Shirley Queen of Scrotes and her Crown Prince of Moobs, Mick, depicted him. We also learned that Danny Dyer, an actor thought of as a sex symbol, is hairy, simian, fat and has man boobs.

Linda is absolutely one of the best characters to be introduced since Kat Slater - certainly, since Max Branning. Sharon Marshall writes a good episode, but sometimes I felt that her dialogue was beginning to get a bit maudlin in places, and as poignant as it was, the story around why Linda was refusing to "let go" of Johnny and the name she gave him, was a bit contrived.

But I suppose that makes better drama than the obvious truth - that Johnny was a premature baby and the youngest child, and mothers often cling the hardest and the longest to the baby. It's the Empty Nest Syndrome.

So Mick and Linda have been parents since they were fifteen, had three kids before they were twenty - they went from childhood to parenthood with no thought of adolescence inbetween. Yes, I can understand that Mick would have wanted a family, but since they managed to live with Linda's mother for the better part of their married life, it's as though they were children in a family situation deferring to an adult. We've heard so much about Elaine, Linda's mother, and how she rolls her eyes every time Elaine would phone to offer advice, isn't this a direct parallel between Linda and Elaine and Johnny and Linda?

And even though Linda was at pains to say that she didn't trap Mick into marriage, that he wanted a family at fifteen, when he was still a child, I'm wondering that if their alliance is borne out of something mistaken for love, but what is, in reality, a fear of anything different or comfort with the familiar. A lot of Linda's ignorance is based on fear; a lot of Mick's is based on resignation.

You know, we see the same sort of set-up with Bianca and Carol, where Carol assumes the ultimate role of overall parent, and Bianca becomes one of the children. The Vic was Mick's and Linda's chance to stand on their own two feet, and now they get the added "bonus" of the presence of Shirley, his sister who's really his mother and who - if the writers and the retconning are to be believed - found sufficient time between seriously courting and getting pregnant by Kevin and marrying him to be the sort of maternal figure Mick adores. And it's Shirley who calls the shots. I really wanted Linda, or at least, Nancy, to smack her silly tonight when she made that bitterly cruel remark about Linda giving parental advice when, according to Shirley, her kids all hate her. Because Shirley is such a f*cking perfect parent. Not. 

Linda may be over-protective and controlling, but she loves her children, and she's a better parent by miles than Shirley would ever be. At least, Linda doesn't lose her rag and try to kill her kids. That's how brutally simplistic Shirley is - because there's a difference of opinion between Linda and her children, Shirley gleefully snatches this as hatred. No, Shirley, Linda's children don't hate her, but yours hate you. Because Dean didn't repay that money to Phil to get you off the hook; he did it because he knew that Phil's money was a debt ultimately down to his profits, because that's the only way that would get paid.

Shirley "celebrates" Dean breaking into the house of a man, whose fiancée had just gone through an horrific attack by intruders, which left her seriously injured, by stealing champagne from her brother's pub - Mick won't miss one bottle of champagne - and invites Dean to stop by the pub later and she'd filch some more drinks. Tell me, does she steal her cigarettes too? This woman gets free room and board out of the goodness of her brother's (son's) heart, a job, a stake in the business, and she's still stealing from him. As is her feckless court jester of a sister. (Aside: I laughed out loud at the name of Linda's parents' pub - the Jester. Do you think that influenced the insipid Tina's subsequent behaviour?)

It's quite amusing and deserving to see Shirley literally piss herself in fright when Phil merely mentions whispering a word in Mick's shell-like. Loved the scene where he turned around and shouted Miiiick!!!!. Shirley can dish out the hardarse attitude and blackmail threats, but she can't take it. And, thus, Phil goes from getting a grand a month from Alfie to getting a grand a week from Dean.

It goes without saying that the scene of the night was that between Timothy West and Kellie Bright, but I thought it was wrong of the family to push the blame of this entire situation on Linda and expect her to apologise. Yes, she was certainly wrong; and, yes, Johnny has to grow up and wants to grow up - but Johnny's growing up on his own terms. He's quite happy to act the baby, with Linda running after him on early morning breakfast runs, when it suits him, but this sort of behaviour enables her own reactions. She apologised and ultimately wished her son well on the pull, hoping he found someone nice; but I didn't hear Johnny apologise for calling Linda a bitch - sorry, a stupid bitch anymore than to acknowledge that it was wrong.

As much as Linda knows her son, so he should know and be a bit more understanding of her. Because of her background and lifestyle choices, Linda is ignorant, fears change, conservative in outlook and afraid of knowledge and anyone with knowledge. Johnny's getting an education, which is knowledge and with knowledge, comes power. Maybe she's afraid of the shift in dynamic. Linda's been a wife and mother since she was fifteen years old. She's known nothing else. She's probably very disapproving and, at the same time, very envious of women who've forged a career or got an education and moved forward. She's never been with anyone but Mick and she believes she never wanted to be otherwise. 

People are uneasy with the final scene - the hug between Dean and Linda - entirely maternal on her part, but something more on his. Rightly so. This is a redux, with a variation, on Sean and Tanya. (No greatest hits except your own, eh, Dom?) For everyone thinking and praying that Mick and Linda aren't torn apart by an affair, consider the previous landlords of the Vic:

• Den and Angie - ripped apart by alcoholism and infidelity
• Grant and Sharon - ripped apart by domestic violence and infidelity
• Peggy and Frank - ripped apart by financial fraud and infidelity
• Alfie and Kat - ripped apart by emotional abuse and infidelity

Spot the common thread. Why should the Carters be any different?

A final thought: When Sharon is properly awake, she's going to wonder why Dean Wicks broke into her bedroom and threw money at Phil.