EastEnders Did The Mitchell brothers save EE im 1990 or could it have carried on?

Discussion in 'UK Soaps Forum' started by ArchieLucasCarringtonEwing1989, Feb 5, 2018.

  1. ArchieLucasCarringtonEwing1989

    ArchieLucasCarringtonEwing1989 Soap Chat Well-Known Member

    Message Count:
    891
    Trophy Points:
    682
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London
    Ratings:
    +1,377
    Member Since:
    22nd June 2010
    1989-90 was a bizarre time for EE, between Den & Angie leaving and The Mitchell brothers claiming Albert Square as their new stomping ground, there were a number of comedic storylines and characters that arrived who had all left by mid 1990.

    Did EE need the Mitchell brothers at that time? Did they save EE back then? And had they not arrived what could've happened or been changed? Aside from the obvious change in storylines I'm referring to the show itself.
     
  2. Walford Boy

    Walford Boy Soap Chat Fan

    Message Count:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    277
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Somewhere Nice
    Ratings:
    +352
    Gender:
    Male
    Member Since:
    Adam was a lad.
    IMO it was a bad move bringing them in, that was when all this gangster crap started.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. ArchieLucasCarringtonEwing1989

    ArchieLucasCarringtonEwing1989 Soap Chat Well-Known Member

    Message Count:
    891
    Trophy Points:
    682
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London
    Ratings:
    +1,377
    Member Since:
    22nd June 2010
    I think they definitely changed the dynamic of the series, initially it was needed, after all how could you replace iconic characters like
    Den and Angie? In a way they were irreplaceable, so I guess the Mitchell family didn't so.much replace them, but more that EE changed literally overnight.

    I don't mind the occasional gangster storyline but it has to be few and far between, I much prefer characters like Den Watts and David Wicks, because they had far more depth and were versatile as characters, it was a shame that David Wicks didn't return in the 00s, as I think he could well have fitted into the series at that time.

    I personally feel that Phil should've been written out in the 1990s, Ross Kemp had the right idea in leaving when he did, there wasn't much more you could do with either Mitchell brother, Phil I think we can all agree has gotten worse since 2000.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. soapfan

    soapfan Soap Chat Member

    Message Count:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    74
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Manchester
    Ratings:
    +12
    I actually preferred Family Affairs to EastEnders, even though I prefer EastEnders to Coronation street since the 1990s. 1989-90 was a bizarre time for CS too because it made the big mistake of going from 2 nights a week to 3 nights a week, which caused todays situation with ratings wars and time progressed from that moment on where the other soaps added episodes on.

    Yes, EastEnders needed the Mitchell brothers, but brought in earlier during 1988 instead, and for the Kathy/Wilmott Brown stuff to happen in 1989 with Den enlisting the Mitchell brothers help against Wilmott Brown, then the Mitchell brothers would have got greater recognition as they've done a lot more for EastEnders then the overrated, cocky Den Watts ever did.
     
    • Creative Creative x 1
  5. ArchieLucasCarringtonEwing1989

    ArchieLucasCarringtonEwing1989 Soap Chat Well-Known Member

    Message Count:
    891
    Trophy Points:
    682
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London
    Ratings:
    +1,377
    Member Since:
    22nd June 2010
    I think the Mitchell bros are way overrated, Den has earned his place in soap history, however the Mitchell bros arriving in 1988 would have been interesting, perhaps Angie would have met them, I always felt that had she stayed Angie would've ended up with either Phil or Grant.
     
  6. soapfan

    soapfan Soap Chat Member

    Message Count:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    74
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Manchester
    Ratings:
    +12
    Basically, 1989-1991 was a difficult time for EastEnders in general - The writers of EastEnders could have gone either way with it, where Den could have returned in 1991 instead of the Mitchell brothers arrival in 1990, and for the Eddie Royle stuff to happen in 1992, but that would have meant no Sharongate and Den would have taken over The Arches garage also and made more enemies for himself. I agree that Angie would have been great with Phil, I mean 2 alcoholics, that would have gone done well as Angie was quite flirtatious and would have wanted to get her revenge on Den for his affair with Jan.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. ArchieLucasCarringtonEwing1989

    ArchieLucasCarringtonEwing1989 Soap Chat Well-Known Member

    Message Count:
    891
    Trophy Points:
    682
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London
    Ratings:
    +1,377
    Member Since:
    22nd June 2010
    I always see the 1989-1991 era as the transitional era between the Watts era and the Phil and Grant era, with Sharon being used to transition the viewers from one era to another.

    EE has always suffered from poor timing, whilst we've seen the
    Beale/Fowler vs Mitchell feud, the one feud we really wanted was an epic Watts vs Mitchell feud, especially Den vs Grant/Phil, we got bits of it during 2003 with Den vs Phil, but Grant was the one previously married to Sharon and mistreated her.

    Angie vs Peggy would've been pf epic proportions, Angie would never have stood for how Peggy treated her daughter, at the same time Angie would've definitely hooked up with Phil or Grant, Den would've seduced Samantha (or Ronnie and Roxy had Den been around by 2007/2008 or had all three been around in the mid 1990s)

    A Mitchell-less EE however would be interesting to see, the only time we got close to that was when pretty much the whole family were absent from 2003 to 2006, when it was just Samantha & Billy - the runts of the litter.
     
  8. soapfan

    soapfan Soap Chat Member

    Message Count:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    74
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Manchester
    Ratings:
    +12
    The problem with EastEnders was that it never moved on from The Mitchell Brothers after the 1990s like it did from Den and Angie in the 1980s.

    I hated how Eddie Royle changed the exterior of The Queen Vic pub, the 2 fires started by The Mitchell Brothers and the exterior of the pub was never consistent in it's yellow/black/brown, like Coronation street has always retained its green/yellow exterior on the pub.

    EastEnders of 1985-1990 and 1990 present are 2 different shows.

    When Phil Mitchell (Steve McFadden) eventually leaves for good, to make up for the loss of Phil and to move on from 1990, the following characters should be brought back:-

    Saeed Jeffery (Andrew Johnson),
    Terry Rich (Gary Whelan),
    Tony Carpenter (Oscar James),
    Debbie Wilkins (Shirley Cheriton),
    Mehmet Osman (Haluk Bilginer),
    Guizin Osman (Ishia Bennison),
    Cassie Carpenter (Delanie Forbes),
    Magda Czajkowski (Kathryn Apanowicz),
    Carol Hanley (Sheila White)

    The above would interact well with the current characters and original characters such as Kathy, Sharon and Dot.
     
  9. soapfan

    soapfan Soap Chat Member

    Message Count:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    74
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Manchester
    Ratings:
    +12

Share This Page