Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Spells &amp; Karma" data-source="post: 389067" data-attributes="member: 23">Episode 288 30th July 1985While the siege storyline might have come out of a cynical ploy to attract viewers and grab some attention back from BBC’s new soap baby EastEnders, as one of the viewers it attracted I’ve always regarded it fondly as my introduction to the series. From a historical perspective, as one of the series’ first over the top storylines (I remember Hilary Kingsley citing it in 1988 as Brookie’s only instance to that point of resorting to “absurd melodrama”) it could be viewed as a precursor to Nineties Brookie, but as a shocking interlude in a series that’s still a long way from exhausting the audience’s goodwill it works.It’s certainly not perfect, and it occurs to me that the things that don’t work for me today are the things I was never particularly fond of. In short, it’s the scenes where the hostages get introspective and “share” with one another. These scenes have just never felt truthful to me. It feels like a kind of forced naturalism which ends up having the opposite effect to that intended. There are times where it feels overly stagey, and not in a good way.Three and a half decades ago, I felt that finding these scenes a slog to get through was one of two things: either it was because it was done so well it was supposed to be difficult to watch or there were layers that I might grow to appreciate as I got older. Today I look at it rather differently, and just think these scenes aren’t the greatest.With dialogue shared between the three hostages, the first ten minutes of #288 contains a lot of material that really ought to be the heart of the story but actually weakens it.I’d say performances and writing both take some of the blame here, but the task on both fronts is made all the more difficult given the characters’ history on the series. I still don’t feel I know them. As a result, a lot of this stuff comes across as self-indulgence.The character of Kate is better served in both performance and writing. As a character she is more level headed, which is always going to come across better. She’s also the character who says the least but when she speaks it makes sense. It’s hard to swear that Sharon Rosita is a better actress than her two peers, but she makes a better impression and she’s also very likeable. In terms of this particular sequence, Kate is removed from the room by John Clarke while Sandra and Pat stay tied up to whisper to one another.I understand that they don’t want John to hear them, and that they’re meant to be exhausted, but it feels the actors are over-emoting to drive this point home with a sledgehammer. I also think there’s too much defeat in the performances that I simply don’t believe.Pat furrows his brows and flares his nostrils and looks to the heavens sighs and whispers every line in a weary whine. And, in fairness to David Easter, he has an unenviable task since Pat is in full self-pitiful flight about how useless he’s been and how he was afraid for himself rather than the women. He speaks quietly and gulps extremely loudly (presumably the mic having to be that much closer to pick up the dialogue) and it all becomes a misophonic nightmare.Then, when Pat decides to stand up to John, Sandra - who has been the one pushing for battle at every step - becomes so panicked at the thought she starts shrieking at him. And I find myself having to come up with yet another theory to try and make sense of her behaviour. Two episodes ago I decided she was a drama queen. In the last episode I thought she lacked the emotional intelligence to read the room. Now I find myself thinking she’s being deliberately perverse for maximum conflict. I dare say it’s a combination of all three. The end result still puts me in mind of Jaws 2's screaming Jackie: there's no situation so serious that it can't be made even more of a big deal with some histrionics.The cause of Sandra flipping and inexplicably suddenly wanting to reach John with reason is Pat slipping his bonds and the writing and performances lean into all the one-dimensional cliches around this. Pat grits his teeth and struggles in pretend pain. It’s all from the school of cheesy American drama (perhaps understandable given there isn’t much in the line of an earthy frame of reference for this kind of outlandish escapade).The rope-slipping writing is filled with innuendo. Pat writhes and contorts his face and opens and closes his eyes as he uses breathy tones to urgently encourage Sandra who is doing something just out of sight:And then he ejaculates a groan of relief as Sandra achieves the desired result and he bursts free. I can’t decide if this parallel is deliberate. Perhaps it's writer or actor seeing how much they can get away with. Perhaps there’s a deep, subliminal context about the bond the situation is creating between Pat and Sandra. Or perhaps it’s just poorly executed. Still… it passed the time.Andrew Lynch’s writing does feel a little off at other points. When, Pat asked John “Are you gonna shoot us?” within a minute of the police setting up their eavesdropping device, my first thought was: how convenient. They’ve been in this situation for over a week, and Pat suddenly decides this is the moment to ask the big question directly.Incidentally, a day after I watched him as Jane Marple’s nephew in 4:50 From Paddington, David McAlister has shown up as one of the key officers who arrives in response to the Collinses’ call to the police. He’s really taking care of business this week.Although I’ve been hard on the siege storyline today, in the context of the bigger picture it’s still working. John’s insane laugh reverberating over the soundtrack as we dissolve to a convoy of police cars hurtling towards the Close, passing the evacuated residents walking away is cinematically exciting and couldn’t fail to bring a viewer back to see what happens next.Damon and Neil's séance was daft fun and I loved every comedic minute. Camilla is a hilarious character. It’s a bit of a shame to see that the two Brookside episodes are Dawn Brady’s only IMDb credits.</blockquote>

Verification: 6 + 4 =

Poison your name this Hallowe'en

There's plenty of time to choose your spooky October username

Click here for more details

Reply to thread