What really annoys me about Brookside ...
D
Brookside ...
It's the lack of references to the past .. For example take Sinbad's recent
treatment my Mike Dixon.
Mike was basically crying where there's smoke there must be fire ... but it
wasn't that many years ago he was arrest for drug trafficing in Thailand. If
I was Sinbad I wouldhave thrown that in his face.
He was caught and arrest with drugs in his possession, which is more then
Sinbad was ever caught doing!!
Diamond
eagl...@marirob.netlineuk.net
Corkhill) were caught drug-trafficking in Thailand? Not very, it seems.
They were innocent. Heroin was planted by Gary Stanlow, Lindsey's
husband, in Kylie's doll to make it look as though they were carrying
it. It was done in revenge. They had no knowledge of the drugs being
there.
Oh yeah, and it was heroin that Jimmy and Gary were pushing.
In article <CCHj5.8788$9A1.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
tayl...@my-deja.com
> How closely did you watch the episode wherein Mike (and Lindsey
> Corkhill) were caught drug-trafficking in Thailand? Not very, it
> seems.
> They were innocent. Heroin was planted by Gary Stanlow, Lindsey's
> husband, in Kylie's doll to make it look as though they were carrying
> it. It was done in revenge. They had no knowledge of the drugs being
> there.
That's the whole point. They were innocent, but they *looked guilty*.
The drugs were even found. In Sinbad's case, he's innocent, and he
*looks innocent*. There's no evidence whatsoever. So D's point is
valid. Mike Dixon of all people should have been able immediately to
sympathise with Sinbad when Sinbad said he'd been unfairly accused. (Of
course, he did support Sinbad at the 'Christening', but only after many
opportunities to do so had passed and much upset had occurred).
Paul
D
friends and family believed in them. No one at first knew Gary planted the
drugs (apart from the viewers)
What Paul says is right Mike or Lydnsey, more then anyone else should have
known how Sinbad was feeling, be the past events of Brookside have been
totally ignored, it's like Brookside's own writer forgot the drugs thing in
Thailand ever happened.
I'm not knocking Brookside, it's by far my favourite British Soap, it's not
depressing like Eastenders. But the trouble with Brookside's amazing story
lines is that sooner or later the past stories are going to catch up with
present day stories.
I kept watching week after week to see even just one person mention the
Thailand thing, and it's like it never happened, may be they don't want to
confuse recent viewers with past events?
Also when the parade blew up wasn't it Sinbad that offered to have his legs
cut off in order to allow the fire crew to get to Lyndsey's daughter? I saw
no mention of that. Surely you can't get a better reference to Sinbad's
character then that!
The other story line that really gets me is the one of Jimmy Corkhill
killing Ron Dixon's son. If I had a child and that happened to me there's no
way I could live in the same street as the bloke that did it, or see him
everydat without wanting to kill him. I think the fact Ron and Jimmy get on
as well as they do is so fake!!
<tayl...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8moj0s$kkk$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
eagl...@marirob.netlineuk.net
"D" <diam...@mcmail.com> wrote:
> Yes thats exactly what I mean they looked guilty to the outside
world, but
> friends and family believed in them. No one at first knew Gary
planted the
> drugs (apart from the viewers)
>
> What Paul says is right Mike or Lydnsey, more then anyone else should
have
> known how Sinbad was feeling, be the past events of Brookside have
been
> totally ignored, it's like Brookside's own writer forgot the drugs
thing in
> Thailand ever happened.
This happens repeatedly on Brookside and has happened more and more so
since 1997. Look at the way Lindsey Corkhill baited Jacqui Dixon about
giving up Harry for money, when she has never ever been a model mother
with the Cabbage Patch doll that doubles for Kylie ... putting her own
interests first, consorting with gangsters and no-marks to achieve a
better standard of living, going off and spending time away on holidays
and with various and sundry *lovers* whilst Jackie C is left all the
drudgery that motherhood entails.
>
> I'm not knocking Brookside, it's by far my favourite British Soap,
it's not
> depressing like Eastenders.
Ah, but have you watched Eastenders lately? Most of the depressive edge
is gone. There's lots of humour to be found in characters like Terry,
Irene and Jim. There's also a geriatric on-off romance between Jim and
Dot Cotton that's humourous, yet poignant, and infinitely more
watchable than the pish dished up by Jessie and Ray. (Talk about a 360-
degree change! Jess Shadwick was always presented as a respectable and
religious woman with moral scruples and principles, someone who took a
serious view of sex before marriage etc. A woman of Jess's background
and upbringing, even though she had been widowed for some years, would
never abandon all that to hop into bed for a surreptitious lay with a
man whose wife had not only been a close friend but who hadn't been in
the grave for a year. She'd take a dim view if Margi Shadwick had done
something like that!)
You should watch Eastenders a bit. There's even a rather inept Cockney
villain, Billy Mitchell, who's laughable as well. (BTW, Sonia and
Jamie, even though they aren't as photogenically perfect as Trona and
Plonkie Steve, are a lot more enjoyable and interesting to watch than
that plastecene pair!)
But the trouble with Brookside's amazing story
> lines is that sooner or later the past stories are going to catch up
with
> present day stories.
Yes. Like, is Mick really divorced? As a married man whose wife
deserted him three years ago, with nary a trace, doesn't he have four
more years to wait until he can even contemplate marriage to Susannah?
What about Lindsey's marital status. She's divorced from Gary Stanlow,
but what about Peter Phelan? No one's ever mentioned her divorcing him
or vice versa.
>
> I kept watching week after week to see even just one person mention
the
> Thailand thing, and it's like it never happened, may be they don't
want to
> confuse recent viewers with past events?
>
> Also when the parade blew up wasn't it Sinbad that offered to have
his legs
> cut off in order to allow the fire crew to get to Lyndsey's daughter?
I saw
> no mention of that. Surely you can't get a better reference to
Sinbad's
> character then that!
Sinbad's tragedy has been that he's been an excellent father figure to
people like Rachel, Tim, Andrew etc., but an ineffectual and even
indifferent father to his own natural child, Ruth. Prior to this year,
he visited her at Christmas and she visited Liverpool once a year. Then
Mandy got married and, instead of asserting his parental rights of
access, he figuratively rolled over and played dead, and then spent a
lot of time navel-gazing and wondering why Ruth was more at ease with
her step-father than with him. Yet did he financially support her? Did
he make time to see her, travelling to Bristol every other weekend to
make the effort to see her? No, he was more concerned with the likes of
Carmel etc.
Another thing ... something Barbara mentioned to Sinbad when she first
fostered Andrew. Sinbad effectively had no parenting skills. He was
more like a big kid, playing games with Andrew, or acting like the
pally older brother to Tim. Yet he was free with parental advice to
Mick. Then suddenly Ruth was out of the picture. There was no mention
whatsoever of her by Sinbad either at Christmas, during the time of the
wedding when she was SUPPOSED to have been a bridesmaid - only recently
has she got a mention - and that was when Mandy denied him access to
her due to the allegations of abuse - another anomaly, given the
circumstances under which Mandy and Sinbad got together in the first
place.
>
> The other story line that really gets me is the one of Jimmy Corkhill
> killing Ron Dixon's son. If I had a child and that happened to me
there's no
> way I could live in the same street as the bloke that did it, or see
him
> everydat without wanting to kill him. I think the fact Ron and Jimmy
get on
> as well as they do is so fake!!
Ron DOESN'T get on with Jimmy. That's still carried on. Not only was
Jimmy responsible for Tony Dixon's death, but also for the death of
Jacqui Dixon's Aussie boyfriend. That never gets a mention. Yet when
the Parade was blown up, Big-Tooth Linds was all over Ron like a bad
rash for what happened to the Cabbage Patch Kid. Ron still has goes to
all and sundry about what Jimmy did - as evidenced when Jimmy initially
asked Bev for a job. BUT ... Ron DOES chat casually with that slag
Leanne, whenever he's in the bar. And she's the person who deliberately
blinded Jacqui Dixon with acid. At the time of her trial Ron, quite
rightly, was baying for her blood. Now he chats quite mately with her
at the bar!
And another anomaly occurred in Benidorm, when Lindsey and Jacqui made
up and Lindsey stated that she wanted for her and Jacqui to be good
mates like they were before Lindsey ruined everything. They were NEVER
good mates!
D
prison looks like she ate a couple of fellow inmates for dinner!!!
I'm sure the actress that plays her got the shock of her life when they
asked her back but by that time she'd doubled in size and didn't ahve the
time to shed it!!
You're right, Ron shouldn't be talking to Leanne, or Jimmy.
He has no reason to slag Sinbad off, when he was the one that blew up the
parade.
I'd certainly like to see old Davis crosby make a guest appearence.
In fact have they ever run competitions to have fans of the series play
extras or anything?
.. Oh what about Trina and Max? I think they would make a good pair, they'd
have the same match dimples on their chins!!!
... East ends ... watched it today becuase my sister was watching it.
Didn't like it as much as brookside... By the way what's yup with Sinbad's
common sense surely he'd realise seeingthe boy breaks the conditions of his
bail??
What's going on with the script writing? It reminds me of a program called
Bread which I loved when it first started and then slowly the writing got
worse ans worse!!
<eagl...@marirob.netlineuk.net> wrote in message
news:8mph95$951$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
eagl...@marirob.netlineuk.net
"D" <diam...@mcmail.com> wrote:
> Actually I'd forgotten about Leanne, Blimy what happened to her
anyway in
> prison looks like she ate a couple of fellow inmates for dinner!!!
>
> I'm sure the actress that plays her got the shock of her life when
they
> asked her back but by that time she'd doubled in size and didn't ahve
the
> time to shed it!!
>
> You're right, Ron shouldn't be talking to Leanne, or Jimmy.
>
He doesn't talk to Jimmy unless it's to get in a barb. But he does
natter with Leanne. It doesn't add up.
> He has no reason to slag Sinbad off, when he was the one that blew up
the
> parade.
>
Ah, but Sinbad is just as guilty indirectly. HE sold Ron the connector
hose, which he legally should NOT have done. Or at least he said, *I'm
putting this hose in the bin, but I can't stop you from taking it out.*
In other words, he turned a blind eye.
> I'd certainly like to see old Davis crosby make a guest appearence.
>
> In fact have they ever run competitions to have fans of the series
play
> extras or anything?
Don't bank on it. That's probably one CLOSED shop. Mersey TV seem like
control-freak nannies. The last thing they'd want is some fan getting
wind of what's about to happen before they are ready to have it leaked.
>
> .. Oh what about Trina and Max? I think they would make a good pair,
they'd
> have the same match dimples on their chins!!!
>
She is a pretty, decorative piece of wood and well suited to Steve
Murray. They should trot off into the sunset to start a forest
somewhere.
> ... East ends ... watched it today becuase my sister was watching it.
>
> Didn't like it as much as brookside...
Possibly because the acting is better but the women are not so
attractive as the bimbos on Brookie.
By the way what's yup with Sinbad's
> common sense surely he'd realise seeingthe boy breaks the conditions
of his
> bail??
This is Brookside.
>
> What's going on with the script writing? It reminds me of a program
called
> Bread which I loved when it first started and then slowly the writing
got
> worse ans worse!!
It's called amateurism and writer's block. As far as the producer is
concerned, it's called *child with a new toy syndrome.*
>
> <eagl...@marirob.netlineuk.net> wrote in message
> news:8mph95$951$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > In article <lKRj5.6902$VO3.1...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com>,
> > "D" <diam...@mcmail.com> wrote:
> Ron DOES chat casually with that slag
> > Leanne, whenever he's in the bar. And she's the person who
deliberately
> > blinded Jacqui Dixon with acid. At the time of her trial Ron, quite
> > rightly, was baying for her blood. Now he chats quite mately with
her
> > at the bar!
>
>
tayl...@my-deja.com
> > .. Oh what about Trina and Max? I think they would make a good pair,
> they'd
> > have the same match dimples on their chins!!!
>
> She is a pretty, decorative piece of wood
Hmmm, something smells good... It's the Gossages!
> Possibly because the acting is better but the women are not so
> attractive as the bimbos on Brookie.
Actually, this is not true. The difference is that the women on EE are
made up to look haggard and worn. For example, the gorgeous Louise
Jamieson will probably be remembered for ever more as the shabby Rosa
DeMarco. I agree with you that the acting is *much* better, but
EastEnders is truly a triumph of drama over entertainment. A big
reason it has such high ratings is because it was launched on BBC1 and
has remained there. If it's so good, let them shunt it over to Channel
4 on Mondays, Thursdays and Fridays at 8:30pm and see if the ratings
don't begin to tumble. (And they're not allowed to cheat by putting
Songs of Praise on BBC1 at that time!)
As for Brookside, there are two changes I would make (apart from moving
it to ITV1 or BBC1) that would definitely get more people watching.
First of all, I would replace most of the scriptwriters. Secondly, I
would cull almost all of the characters over the next twelve months.
Most of the problems that D identifies arise from bad scriptwriting
coupled with the fact that both the Corkhills and the Dixons are still
in the show after all these years. There should be continuity in the
form of a few established, popular characters - but most of the cast
should not stay for more than 18 months max, with quite a few coming
and going in considerably less time.
This is how it's done:
Trona gets pregnant to Max, big scandal. But they get married and leave
happily. Steve Murray commits suicide. Mr Murray has an affair with
Susannah. Adele finds out, and confides in Emily. Emily shows her where
they keep the kitchen knife. Adele kills Susannah. Diane gets pregnant
with quintuplets, and goes into premature labour when she finds out
that her daughter is a murderer. Ant is revealed as the anti-christ,
and moves to Rome to take up his rightful place. The remaining Murrays
leave because they need a bigger house for all those babies. Mick,
distraught at Susannah's death, parcels up Emma and Harry and sends
them to Max and Trona. He then goes 'off on one' and never returns. Leo
leaves to join the police force. Tinhead and Emily get caught and
jailed. New family moves into the Johnston's house, with no explanation
has to where all the furniture etc. went (sounds familiar?). Meanwhile,
the Dixons finally put their differences aside with the Corkhills. They
all decide to go on holiday together (including Rachael and Katie). As
the Brookie music comes on at the end of the episode, we see their
plane soaring off into the sunset. Big explosion has plane detonates in
a shower of beautiful pyrotechnics. Brookie music keeps going as though
nothing had happened.
eagl...@marirob.netlineuk.net
tayl...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > > .. Oh what about Trina and Max? I think they would make a good
pair,
> > they'd
> > > have the same match dimples on their chins!!!
> >
> > She is a pretty, decorative piece of wood
>
> Hmmm, something smells good... It's the Gossages!
>
> > Possibly because the acting is better but the women are not so
> > attractive as the bimbos on Brookie.
>
> Actually, this is not true. The difference is that the women on EE are
> made up to look haggard and worn. For example, the gorgeous Louise
> Jamieson will probably be remembered for ever more as the shabby Rosa
> DeMarco.
I don't think 'haggard' is the right word, although to some degree in
some of the older actresses, it might be applied. I think 'ordinary'
might be a better word. I think the producer has striven to portray
people you could pass in any street. When the show began, Wendy Richard
was made to look 'careworn' because her storyline showed her as being a
middle-aged woman, pregnant, with a pregnant daughter, a son in trouble
with the law, an unemployed husband and an elderly mother. If Wendy
Richard looks 'haggard' now, it's probably due in part to her having
recently suffered cancer.
I wouldn't say Louise Jamieson was made to look haggard, but I think
she was glammed down to appear realistically as an overworked,
worrywart Italian mother. Babs Windsor's probably the most 'glamourous'
of the older women, but that's in keeping with her part. In Brookside,
apart from Kitty and Cheryl, the two older women in the cast (Jess and
Anthea) are glamour dolls compared to the women on EE.
As far as the younger set are concerned, EE has done well recently with
its subtle image message in the Sonia-Jamie storyline. Underplayed
perfectly and quite effective. This is EE taking up where Brookside
lost the plot. An adenoidal, overweight adolescent girl and a puny boy
who resembles an anorexic younger version of David Beckham wouldn't get
a look in on Brookside, but look how they act rings around Tim and Em!
At the moment, Tamsin Outhwaite is about the most attractive girl on
the show. Lucy Benjamin is unconventionally pretty, and the Waterman
girl is positively plain, but they are all excellent in their roles.
It's also clever the way the EE writers interweave the stories. On one
level, you have plain Sonia being chased by a boy everyone perceives to
be attractive, and appreciated by him for her worth. Then you have Ian,
the toerag, who thinks his financial success entitles him to a trophy
wife, acquiring and shamelessly using a plain nanny, who sees beyond
his wealth and is able to see *some* good in the creature.
The fact that it's better written than Brookside is evidenced by the
fact that several of EE's recent storylines have been noticed three-six
months down the line being adapted to suit Brookside's standards.
EG:-
Blonde bride-to-be on a beach in Brighton snogs and bonks ex-boyfriend
weeks before her wedding to wealthy entrepreneur. (EE)
Blond bride-to-be on a beach in Benidorm snogs fit Scouse stranger
weeks before her wedding to aristocrat. (Brookie)
Double wedding with wealthy couple reluctant and poor couple truly in
love. (EE and Brookside)
Hen trip to Amsterdam with uninvited guest. (EE)
Hen trip to Benidorm with two uninvited guests. (Brookie)
On-screen murder and concealment of body, with ensuing plotline running
for a year. (EE 1999 and about to be Brookside 2000-2001).
I agree with you that the acting is *much* better, but
> EastEnders is truly a triumph of drama over entertainment.
In fact EE and Corrie now no longer refer to themselves as soaps, but
as continuing dramas.
A big
> reason it has such high ratings is because it was launched on BBC1 and
> has remained there. If it's so good, let them shunt it over to Channel
> 4 on Mondays, Thursdays and Fridays at 8:30pm and see if the ratings
> don't begin to tumble. (And they're not allowed to cheat by putting
> Songs of Praise on BBC1 at that time!)
Point taken. But Channel 4 IS trying to enter mainstream entertainment
more and more - eg the cricket, with which they've done a good job.
They've always made Brookside *compatible* with other soaps on other
networks. It's on at 8:00PM on Tuesdays, immediately after EE finishes
etc. One of the reasons Emmerdale has become successful has been due to
the fact that it preceeds Corrie.
>
> As for Brookside, there are two changes I would make (apart from
moving
> it to ITV1 or BBC1) that would definitely get more people watching.
THIS is why EE and Corrie snap all the soap awards.
> First of all, I would replace most of the scriptwriters.
Except for the likes of Carmel Morgan. She's OK. What happened to the
better writers. Check out early Brookside on UK Living. They are up to
1992 now. Watch an episode and just LISTEN to the dialogue. Then WATCH
the actors saying it. There are no 'Ermmmms...', 'Coom 'eds...', smutty
jokes. Everything that's said can be understood, and there's no rolling
of the eyes, waving arms, screaming, mugging faces pulled. Not only is
the writing perceptive and interesting, the acting is good - and this
includes characters like Ron (whose character is TOTALLY
unrecogniseable to the current bigot), Mick, Sinbad, Jacqui, Jimmy and
Max!
Somewhere after 1997, Brookside acquired a load of s*** writers. The
PROFESSIONALS amongst the acting crew suffered as a result and the
wannabe pros are too thick to know anything else other than the crap
they are being given.
Secondly, I
> would cull almost all of the characters over the next twelve months.
> Most of the problems that D identifies arise from bad scriptwriting
> coupled with the fact that both the Corkhills and the Dixons are still
> in the show after all these years.
Whilst I DO think that a lot of the characters in Brookside are past
their sell-by dates, I wouldn't get rid of ALL the Dixons and
Corkhills. In EE, the only originals left there are Pauline, Ian and
Dot. I actually LONG for the day when EE has the temerity to rid the
show of Pauline, Martin and Mark Fowler, but the other two are
watchable.
As far as Brookside goes, I'd call Jim's number. All they seem to do is
give him druggie storylines. His current mental health line is an
insult to people suffering that malaise, and he's too old to revert to
being a scally. The way this show is going, I wouldn't be surprised to
see him have a gender crisis next. Jim can go - Dean Sullivan would
have answered ITV's call and mega-bucks deal last year had Marquess not
matched their figure at the eleventh hour. Ditto Lindsey. Bad actress,
bad singer. She wouldn't have lasted a year on either EE or Corrie. God
only knows how someone of her acting inability has sustained four years
of major storylines. It can't be because of her allure either. Axe her.
Jackie can stay. She deserves some good luck and not countless worry
and suffer storylines.
As for the Dixons, just rid the show of Mike and the bovine Rachel.
After the Sinbad ordeal finishes, it's a sure bet we won't see Tiffany
Chapman for another six months - just like last year; and Paul Byatt
will just be propping up Bev's Bar.
It's interesting to note that Karen Drury (Susannah) WASN'T sacked. She
quit as she saw no future in her character. She is quoted as saying,
like Mickey Starke, she was looking forward to the freedom to do other
things. That's been an inflexibility about Brookside. Corrie and EE are
quite good about their cast taking other film/stage/TV roles when they
arise. Brookside has had this 'Brookside-or-nothing' attitude.
I'd axe Vic and Darren. The characters are not working. Also the
Scouser boys, Robbie and Clint. Katie Rogers can go with them. She's
taken up the Susannah-repetitive-storyline mantle. Another
inappropriate boyfriend with a secret. She's been with a cultist, a
secret single dad, a rapist. What's Clint hiding? Is he a transvestite?
A bisexual? Ex-druggie? It's a bit predictable after awhile.
Emily and Jess Shadwick can go. Pair Ray off, if you must, with
Bridget, Di(re)'s mum. It would be great to see her interact with Kitty.
Bye to Trona and Dave as well as Leanne, Lance and ALL the Murrays.
Bring back ... a DECENT boyfriend for Jacqui Dixon - Charles Cuddington
or Barry Grant.
Bring back ... Mr. Moore as Mick's new lodger, Ollie and Danny Simpson,
That Karen One the teacher, Jenny Swift for awhile.
There should be continuity in the
> form of a few established, popular characters - but most of the cast
> should not stay for more than 18 months max, with quite a few coming
> and going in considerably less time.
>
EE and Corrie usually give a character a year. If after a year, the
role's not working, then they simply don't renew the contract. Phil
Redmond, I recall, in defending the Musgroves (pre-Marquess) said that
after a year, they'd come good. He was right. People were beginning to
warm to them as a family when they were axed.
JNugent
> > > .. Oh what about Trina and Max? I think they would make a good pair,
> > > they'd have the same match dimples on their chins!!!
> > She is a pretty, decorative piece of wood
> Hmmm, something smells good... It's the Gossages!
Wasn't there a character / family by that name, back in the days of the
Collins family (with the original actor playing Gordon Collins)?
Gossage Snr (never seen) was a neighbour or friend of the Collins family
when they lived on the Wirral and reportedly ran a garage doing "dodgy"
MOTs. His som Mark appeared as a schoolfriend of Gordon Collins...
graeme...@virgin.net
news:8msd4m$71m$2...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Wasn't there a character / family by that name, back in the days of
the
> Collins family (with the original actor playing Gordon Collins)?
>
> Gossage Snr (never seen) was a neighbour or friend of the Collins
family
> when they lived on the Wirral and reportedly ran a garage doing
"dodgy"
> MOTs. His som Mark appeared as a schoolfriend of Gordon Collins...
You're quite right - I'd forgotten that. Mark Gossage, friend of Gordon
Collins, appeared during 1983. Father Paul disliked the guy with a
passion.
Gray.
graeme...@virgin.net
news:Qa2k5.10735$9A1.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> Didn't like it as much as brookside... By the way what's yup with
Sinbad's
> common sense surely he'd realise seeingthe boy breaks the conditions
of his
> bail??
Well, that was dawning on him at the end of Tuesday's episode and
tonight's had him regreting the visit totally. You can understand him
feeling the need to go over and see Andrew, though - in jis position,
he's gonna be feeling that it's rapidly becoming his *only* option.
Gray.
graeme...@virgin.net
news:8mr8tu$ci1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Actually, this is not true. The difference is that the women on EE are
> made up to look haggard and worn. For example, the gorgeous Louise
> Jamieson will probably be remembered for ever more as the shabby Rosa
> DeMarco.
Not in this house, she won't! She'll *always* be Leela (sp?) from
Doctor Who.
> I agree with you that the acting is *much* better, but
> EastEnders is truly a triumph of drama over entertainment. A big
> reason it has such high ratings is because it was launched on BBC1 and
> has remained there. If it's so good, let them shunt it over to Channel
> 4 on Mondays, Thursdays and Fridays at 8:30pm and see if the ratings
> don't begin to tumble. (And they're not allowed to cheat by putting
> Songs of Praise on BBC1 at that time!)
The BBC don't keep messing about with its transmission times, either.
How the hell do C4 expect to keep their viewers' loyalty when they can't
decide when to show the programme? We're back to 20:30, next Wednesday
BTW, if I heard the announcer correctly this evening.
> As for Brookside, there are two changes I would make (apart from
moving
> it to ITV1 or BBC1) that would definitely get more people watching.
> First of all, I would replace most of the scriptwriters. Secondly, I
> would cull almost all of the characters over the next twelve months.
> Most of the problems that D identifies arise from bad scriptwriting
> coupled with the fact that both the Corkhills and the Dixons are still
> in the show after all these years. There should be continuity in the
> form of a few established, popular characters - but most of the cast
> should not stay for more than 18 months max, with quite a few coming
> and going in considerably less time.
'Popular' is a difficult one - just look at some of the discussions on
the popularity of characters according to folk in this NG.
What, you're going to leave us with Darren, Vic, Jessie and Ray? Do we
*really* deserve that?! ;-)
Gray.
Dave
>
>The other story line that really gets me is the one of Jimmy Corkhill
>killing Ron Dixon's son. If I had a child and that happened to me there's no
>way I could live in the same street as the bloke that did it, or see him
>everydat without wanting to kill him. I think the fact Ron and Jimmy get on
>as well as they do is so fake!!
The thing between Ron and Jimmy was squared (well, kind of - in soaps
law) when Ron was instrumental in little Jimmy's death. He told the
gangsters he was at home, so they went straight there and killed him.
Dave