|
|
Post by BillyNiblick on Nov 1, 2006 21:21:18 GMT
It was bad enough when The Sun was frothing at the gash over a plot strand involving Sally Webster and her daughter Rawzeh going for a drive out to the beauty spot near where they live, Saddleworth Moor. According to Britain's number one purveyor of bollocks to the masses, this was in fact a sick and tasteless re-creation of Ian Brady and Myra Hindley driving an innocent child they'd kidnapped up there in order to slaughter and bury them in a shallow grave, just as they did back in 1967(or thereabouts).
Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the soap, it turns out that Corrie has now staged an equally sick re-creation of the murder of two ten-year-old girls in the Cambridgeshire village of Soham a couple of summers ago. Apparently, Charlie Stubbs trying to frighten the noxious David Platt away from threatening to expose his dalliance with Maria by dunking his barnett in the bath was a carbon copy of the murders in Soham, which apparently involved the victims being drowned in a bath.
Errm, except that Charlie didn't drown David, and never intended to do so. And that Charlie isn't a school caretaker. And that he didn't attack two girls. And that Ian Huntley didn't just dunk the two girls a few times. Oh, yeah - and that Coronation Street is a fictional drama. But jeez - ain't it just tasteless and offensive anyway?
I do wonder what the next objection will be to a nebulously tenuous reminder of a tragic child murder which some half-wit detects in a soap opera. Sheesh.
|
|
|
|
Post by CG Wendy on Nov 1, 2006 21:54:13 GMT
I never even thought of poor Holly and Jessica when Charlie dunked Davids head in the bathwater.
I`m sure the Corrie writers would never intentionally distress the parents of Holly and Jessica.
|
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Nov 1, 2006 21:56:56 GMT
Why not? They deliberately went out of their way to distress Barbara by reinacting her flast trashing.
Patsy
|
|
Mrs Demigod
Cellarman
just a cog in the machine
Posts: 305
|
Post by Mrs Demigod on Nov 1, 2006 22:13:12 GMT
In the case of Barbara and her flat trashing I would hope that if she objected to do such a thing they would respect that objection as it is a very valid one. As far as David Platt is concerned, Charlie was just playing on a fear that David Platt had. Richard Hillman drove the car into the canal, and as a consequence David ever since has been terrified of water, so Charlie used that fear in order to put David in his place. I seriously doubt the writers were thinking of Holly and Jessica when they wrote that. At least I should really hope not!
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Nov 1, 2006 23:08:29 GMT
I don't suppose anyone thought of poor Holly and Jessica CG..except some shit stirring gutter journalist..Its typical of the press whipping up nonsense over nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by valda on Nov 2, 2006 1:21:56 GMT
nicely put Nick I agree,
|
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Nov 2, 2006 13:43:53 GMT
I heard they tell people what to do and lump it these days, Alice. Watching it you could tell she wasn't happy about it as she wasn't giving her all. Unless that was only noticeable to me as that was all I watched bar from Ed's confession which was better.
Patsy
|
|
Mrs Demigod
Cellarman
just a cog in the machine
Posts: 305
|
Post by Mrs Demigod on Nov 5, 2006 13:05:47 GMT
I heard they tell people what to do and lump it these days, Alice. Watching it you could tell she wasn't happy about it as she wasn't giving her all. Unless that was only noticeable to me as that was all I watched bar from Ed's confession which was better. Patsy Well that is a bit uncalled for, if Barbara Knox was not comfortable renacting an event she suffered in her real life that caused her great distress then it would have been very wrong for the team to pursue that of her. Considering the length of time she has been a member of the cast, you would assume that the team would have more respect fo her and all she has given over the years. |
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Nov 5, 2006 16:02:30 GMT
It's all ratings these days though, isn't it? They don't care at all. She's hardly likely to quit over it and they'd have known that. If John Savident is right TPTB give the orders then everyone from Steve Frost down has no choice but to comply whether they like it or not. I was always against that storyline right from when it was in the paper last December. It was very cruel of them. If she was asked she probably said fine to show her professionalism. But chances are the girl playing Orchid had already been booked and scripts written so it's a fait accompli.
Patsy
|
|
|
|
Post by pearly queen on Nov 5, 2006 16:07:26 GMT
They can change scripts and schedules at short notice when certain OTHER cast member have personal issues: they accommodated Jimi Harkishan and Craig Charles quick enough when they were busted for drugs - so they could make allowances for someone if they really wanted to.
|
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Nov 5, 2006 16:15:27 GMT
Yep. I wonder if they did consult her though? Or if she just got the script and got upset? It was less than 10 months since she had her break in to filming. It's double standards all round and always has been. They axe people for their boozing, behaviour, etc while keep on others.
Patsy
|
|
|
|
Post by Cheetah on Nov 6, 2006 13:09:33 GMT
Can we try turning that on it's head for a mo - supposing she wanted to do it as a means of showing people just what it feels like. Also she might have found it a way of getting her feelings out in the open. I'm sure nobody would have wanted to be cruel or insensitive - it could even have been her own suggestion.
|
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Nov 6, 2006 16:13:33 GMT
If she wanted to then I'm sure her performance would have been better. She was holding back.
Patsy
|
|
