# Eastenders should be banned



## Teatime (8 Jan 2010)

I watched part of an episode of Eastenders this evening (not sure why) and I watched about 9/10 characters. Everyone of them had a dour, miseable expression. It was awful viewing. Depressing stuff.

Does anyone watch this soap anymore and if so, why?


----------



## Caveat (9 Jan 2010)

I am firmly of the belief that all soaps are harmful to the human psyche and sense of self.  Eastenders is probably worse than most.


----------



## becky (9 Jan 2010)

I like most I suspect gave up on soaps years ago(I'm almost 40). However, like many I am following the Christian and Syed (Chryed) storyline at the moment. I do agree that it probably would be the most depressing place to live.


----------



## liaconn (9 Jan 2010)

I don't watch soaps anymore either, but Eastenders was always the most depressing of all of them. Everyone lives in dingy, dark, gloomy flats and goes around with long faces shouting and snapping at each other. They also seem to live in a time warp and haven't moved on since WWll. I keep expecting to hear air raid wardens and see everyone sitting around in shelters with curlers in their hair.


----------



## mathepac (9 Jan 2010)

liaconn said:


> I don't watch soaps anymore either, ... Everyone lives in dingy, dark, gloomy flats and goes around with long faces shouting and snapping at each other. They also seem to live in a time warp and haven't moved on since WWll. I keep expecting to hear air raid wardens and see everyone sitting around in shelters with curlers in their hair.


----------



## liaconn (9 Jan 2010)

I was talking about Eastenders, Mathepac. I always feel that, - despite the gritty storylines, -the whole setting and look of the place and everyone living and working and mating within a mile of the square and whole families living in flats beside their relatives, is like one of those old wartime films and it's hard to imagine the characters in a normal 21st century setting eg a modern housing estate.


----------



## S.L.F (9 Jan 2010)

mathepac said:


>


 




liaconn said:


> I don't watch soaps anymore either, but Eastenders was always the most depressing of all of them. Everyone lives in dingy, dark, gloomy flats and goes around with long faces shouting and snapping at each other. They also seem to live in a time warp and haven't moved on since WWll. I keep expecting to hear air raid wardens and see everyone sitting around in shelters with curlers in their hair.


 
+1

Yuck awful stuff

I watched Deep-enders for a while then just couldn't watch it anymore how can people watch such dull angry people, has a single marriage survive without an affair or something really bad happening.

I know the writers both hate Christmas but really every single Christmas I watched it I recall something really awful happen (eg. Dirty Den giving Angie divorce papers on Christmas day).

For me the worst of the lot was when Pauline went to Ireland and they really took "Pigs in the Parlour" to an extreme (if I recall correctly Tony Blair to his credit apologised).


----------



## Teatime (9 Jan 2010)

liaconn said:


> I don't watch soaps anymore either, but Eastenders was always the most depressing of all of them.


 
There was one character yesterday that really got to me - she looked like she was contorting her face to look even gloomier and depressing than the others. She reminded me of Myra Hindley - evil looking. Dont know her character name but she is blonde, around 50 and lives with Phil.


----------



## MandaC (9 Jan 2010)

Teatime said:


> There was one character yesterday that really got to me - she looked like she was contorting her face to look even gloomier and depressing than the others. She reminded me of Myra Hindley - evil looking. Dont know her character name but she is blonde, around 50 and lives with Phil.




Ah, I know who you mean .......she has been in a few things before Eastenders, one of them was in a prison or something.  I dont watch EE either, but I have switched through it a few times and spotted her, I dont think she is making faces, that is just her real face, she is just not very good looking.


----------



## Lex Foutish (9 Jan 2010)

I always presumed that Eastenders was produced by the manufacturers of Prozac.................


----------



## sunrock (10 Jan 2010)

Eastenders is unfortunately a realistic portrayal of peoples demeanour in the gritty east end of london.
You might as well call for a ban on  hillstreet blue, or on war scenes in poor countries.If you don`t like it just don`t watch it.


----------



## mercman (10 Jan 2010)

sunrock said:


> Eastenders is unfortunately a realistic portrayal of peoples demeanour in the gritty east end of london.



Funny I think it is the very same as living in certain parts of any modern city. Not much different than parts of Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Galway, Waterford etc. plus Belfast, Derry, Ballymena etc. To those that don't like it maybe it is simply to much of a reminder of what is going on down the road.


----------



## DavyJones (10 Jan 2010)

For people who don't watch the show, you know alot about it.

Admit it, ye love it


----------



## johnd (10 Jan 2010)

I agree with the remarks about Eastenders.  Fair City is a much more realist. Nobody in that soap  lives or works near their relatives or just gets a job as a mechanic or chief without any training and murders are quite rare, about one a year and everyone is so happy all the time  

By the way the women nobody seemed to know the name of is Shirley.. she reminds me a bit of Carol in Fair City


----------



## liaconn (10 Jan 2010)

S.L.F said:


> For me the worst of the lot was when Pauline went to Ireland and they really took "Pigs in the Parlour" to an extreme (if I recall correctly Tony Blair to his credit apologised).


 
Oh God, yes. I remember the 'poor Irish' being very impressed with Pauline and assuming she'd be the kind of rich person who would 'own a washing machine'. And the local teenagers being overawed by Pauline's son who had 'been to a night club'. This was in the 1990s not the 1950s .


----------



## MandaC (10 Jan 2010)

Never mind EE - am cracking up because I cant get out and have had to endure The All Ireland Talent Show - if you want to give out about something - watch this!


----------



## Chocks away (10 Jan 2010)

Eastenders banned? Not sure about that. But it's viewers could be sectioned . Hey, don't get excited. It's just my opinion.


----------



## mathepac (10 Jan 2010)

Chocks away said:


> ...  viewers could be sectioned . ....


Should "could" be "should"?


----------



## Teatime (11 Jan 2010)

johnd said:


> By the way the women nobody seemed to know the name of is Shirley.. she reminds me a bit of Carol in Fair City


 
Well I don't know what her character is all about but she always looks like a bulldog chewing a nettle with a wasp stinging its nose.

Dreadful viewing all in all. At least a show like Coronation Street has likeable and humourous characters/storylines.


----------



## micamaca (11 Jan 2010)

What's even worse, it seems to be on every station at once. The last time I remember there being humour in it was about ten years ago when Phil and Grant used to be quite funny. But they've probably left by now...haven't watched it since. 

But am sick of seeing it coming on. Yes, I can change station but why are we paying a licence fee for such abysmal depressing rubbish.


----------



## gebbel (11 Jan 2010)

sunrock said:


> Eastenders is unfortunately a realistic portrayal of peoples demeanour in the gritty east end of london.
> You might as well call for a ban on hillstreet blue, or on war scenes in poor countries.If you don`t like it just don`t watch it.


 
Agreed. Eastenders is, however, complete tripe that surprisingly has a major appeal to so many. Up to 12 million UK viewers tune in and that is twice the average number that watch the news there. Not sure about Irish viewers...hopefully we are a more discerning lot but I have my doubts!!


----------



## becky (12 Jan 2010)

micamaca said:


> What's even worse, it seems to be on every station at once. The last time I remember there being humour in it was about ten years ago when Phil and Grant used to be quite funny. But they've probably left by now...haven't watched it since.
> 
> But am sick of seeing it coming on. Yes, I can change station but why are we paying a licence fee for such abysmal depressing rubbish.


 
It's on RTE 1 and BBC at the same time - much like Corrie.  TV3 got Corrie a few years ago so RTE picked up Enders.  I'm not a massive fan but if I had to choose I'd pick Enders over Corrie.


----------



## MANTO (12 Jan 2010)

The thing i cannot understand is EE seems to win soap of the year each year? 

I am going to the National TV Awards in the O2 London at the end of the month, i will let you know if they win again..... i am sure everybody will be on tenderhooks till then


----------



## Yorrick (12 Jan 2010)

Yes gebbel. You are right to have your doubts. The entire soap opera collection are very popular in Ireland as can be witnessed by Ryans Tubridys obsession with wheeling on ex soap "stars"  to rapturous applause.
As regards their acting ability they are fairly pathetic and most sink without trace once they are killed off.


----------



## S.L.F (12 Jan 2010)

liaconn said:


> Oh God, yes. I remember the 'poor Irish' being very impressed with Pauline and assuming she'd be the kind of rich person who would 'own a washing machine'. And the local teenagers being overawed by Pauline's son who had 'been to a night club'. This was in the 1990s not the 1950s .


 
Or the young girl (about 12?) who was talking about the Banshee,

awful tripe.


----------



## sunrock (12 Jan 2010)

The acting in EASTENDERS is actually very good.Some of the acting by some characters in FAIR CITY is very poor.I don`t understand why RTE buy this programme from the BBC, as almost everyone has BBC anyway.How much does it cost?
Yes that SHIRLEY is a dreadful sex hungry bitch.I wouldn`t want her to get her claws on me.


----------



## liaconn (12 Jan 2010)

Yorrick said:


> As regards their acting ability they are fairly pathetic and most sink without trace once they are killed off.


 
Acting in a soap does appear to be the kiss of death for most actors. How many of them leave in a blaze of glory, all talk about how they've had a great time but now want to try other things and are considering several offers, then slink back a couple of years later to their old role, having not been seen on our screens since?


----------



## MANTO (12 Jan 2010)

liaconn said:


> then slink back a couple of years later to their old role, having not been seen on our screens since?


 
Or sink into the Jungle with the rest of the so called Celebs


----------



## cork (12 Jan 2010)

I watched Law & Order UK last night - far superior to soap fodder.

Easterenders and Desperate Housewives are crap.

Fair City is a waste of time.

RTE then put on Mad Man at 11.30pm and give prime time slots to soap fodder.


----------



## PyritePete (12 Jan 2010)

cork said:


> Fair City is a waste of time.


 
In our household we call it Fairly ****ty


----------



## sunrock (14 Jan 2010)

In fairness to fair city it is a home produced soap set in our capital city . It gives employment and helps aspiring talent and provides moderate entertainment. Why we need to use licence payers money to buy foreign soaps when practically everyone has access to the BBC is beyond me.


----------



## PyritePete (15 Jan 2010)

I can stomach most home produced programmes, its the standard of acting in F City that is poor and as for Eastenders...


----------



## sunrock (15 Jan 2010)

Well we need some home produced soap so that our young actors/actresses can improve their acting skills even from a very low level. Isn`t that how Colin Farrel started? Any talent will be spotted and move on.Its just like soccer in Dublin. A good young talent will be signed by an english club ,then complaining about the poor quality of whats left is not really fair.
The only thing is, there was one young girl actress who was so atrociously bad that the only conclusion I came to was she was well connected......still happens a lot in RTE.


----------



## PyritePete (16 Jan 2010)

There's more than just one bad actress though. RTE have produced some excellent shows etc, its this one that's poor


----------



## liaconn (16 Jan 2010)

sunrock said:


> Well we need some home produced soap so that our young actors/actresses can improve their acting skills even from a very low level. Isn`t that how Colin Farrel started? Any talent will be spotted and move on.Its just like soccer in Dublin. A good young talent will be signed by an english club ,then complaining about the poor quality of whats left is not really fair.
> The only thing is, there was one young girl actress who was so atrociously bad that the only conclusion I came to was she was well connected......still happens a lot in RTE.


 
Is that really the purpose of home produced programmes? To train and educate aspiring actors so that they can head off abroad and make their fortune? As license payers are we not entitled to expect a certain standard of competency from our home programmes? I would have thought that any actor/actress being signed up for a prime time and expensively produced soap opera should already be able to act. They should be honing their skills on small inexpensive productions which don't go out at prime time and in local theatres etc.


----------



## daithi (17 Jan 2010)

..ah yes, Eastenders, or chavs shouting at each other in cockney, as I like to call it...

daithi


----------



## Mopsy (21 Jan 2010)

Teatime said:


> I watched part of an episode of Eastenders this evening (not sure why) and I watched about 9/10 characters. Everyone of them had a dour, miseable expression. It was awful viewing. Depressing stuff.
> 
> Does anyone watch this soap anymore and if so, why?




Never follow it! When changing channels, I stumble across it. Cannot stand the accent, which is by and large, put on and I am unable to understand what they are saying so no watch for me!


----------



## riddles (24 Jan 2010)

I suppose the objective with 70% of TV is that you turn your brain off and become a vacuous receptacle for advertisers.

Case in point I - I never watch the X factor but the other half had sky +'d it and there was at least 25% adverts + about 20% mindless recapping.

If you take Big Brother, I’m a celebrity, the Premier League, Jordan or come dancing – its all contrived by marketing to generate revenue.  It’s a race to the bottom where image is everything and substance is nothing (unless of course you include substance abuse)

With the brain its not a case of garbage in - garbage out so I do agree plugging into any of the above is not good for your overall well being!


----------



## sunrock (29 Jan 2010)

liaconn said:


> Is that really the purpose of home produced programmes? To train and educate aspiring actors so that they can head off abroad and make their fortune? As license payers are we not entitled to expect a certain standard of competency from our home programmes? I would have thought that any actor/actress being signed up for a prime time and expensively produced soap opera should already be able to act. They should be honing their skills on small inexpensive productions which don't go out at prime time and in local theatres etc.


 
Point taken,the soap "fair city" is about producing entertainment for the T.V. audience. Surely the fair city casters are trawling the local theaters and drama schools looking for good actresses and actors. I am sure that there is a bit of " pulling" but maybe the standard isn`t that good and we  have to have a local soap for entertainment.


----------

