The Mitchell's arrival in 1990. Good or bad move?

[CAEF]

Starting in the early summer of 1988, EE went through a huge change with many major originals leaving and that huge change culminated with the arrival of the Mitchell's in Feb 1990. I do feel that is when the show took a "jump the shark" moment then as that is when the gangster stuff begun, and often at the expense of reality. By mid 1994, Phil and Grant had burned down almost half the square/put other residents in hospital/did more dodgy deals than Del Boy and were still walking the streets.

[AaronSilver]

The Mitchells were/are/will always be awful, but TPTB are convinced they've got it right, and that's all that matters guys isn't it? 

[Zeus89]

Watching early Phil Mitchell it's hard to watch.

I actually liked Phil a lot back in his early years, and his character development shows what years of living in walford can do to the soul and body.

I still want, when phil dies for him die alone with him having a series of flashbacks to points in his life and the viewer's get to see how bitter and evil he grows as he ages.

[CAEF]

Also by 1992/1993, much of the square was "poshed up" and the gritty inner city feel that Tony and Julia had was evaporating fast.

I wish Tony and Julia or at least one of them, returned to EE in the 1990s and I am sure they would have disapproved of "The Mitchell Show".

[kitkat1971]

At the time, most definitely good. I remember watching them arrive on the 5th Anniversary and feeling it was exactly the shot in the arm the show needed. A healthy dose of 'new" EastEnd.

I think a lot of people forget just how bad things got in 88 and 89. It wasn't just several major cast members leaving (though of course that didn't help) - it was the lack of story planning.

The fact is Smith and Holland mapped out storylines for 3 years at the start and whilst some changes did have to be made (such as Mark leaving leading to Wicksy coming in much earlier than planned) they stuck fairly closely to it and it meant the show had cohesion.

Once that ended, the show floundered and there leaving made it worse. Because the show was known to be 'grtty' they went further down that path and everything got sooooo depressing. Anyone else remember Trevor the Doctor Who fan having a near nervous breakdown in the cafe for no discernable reason except that everybody had to be miserable?
And neither the Butchers nor Eddie Royale really worked in.The Vic..

The Mitchell brothers along with Sam were, at the time, a breath of fresh air. Aside from anything else, they were funny!

I don't think it's fair to lay the Gangster and Crime stuff solely at their door. They were fairly.low key crime wise at first. Odd dodgy MOT certificate was about as far as it went. Yes, Grant was violent but there was a good reason for it (PTSD) which worked dramatically and it wasn't constant.

The Gangland stuff had always been a part of the show, we were told very early on that Den and Pete had been at school with boys who'd gone on to become career criminals and whilst Pete gave them a wide berth, Den was in touch and did the odd deal with them. Basically, he knew who to call if needs be and in time he did, leading to The Dagmar being burnt down and The Firm properly moving in to Albert Square by.opening the upmarket Strokes as a front for money.laundering.

So that was all there pre Mitchells.

Their mistake with the Mitchells, imo, was changing Phil after Grant left into some kind of invincible hard man who was a major player in organised crime. And retconning their whole history as to what Eric was like.

[CAEF]

But Grant's PTSD is not an excuse to beat people up. If I was a judge I would make no allowances for PTSD sufferers if they committed serious crimes. I'd still have them pay for their actions. The PTSD card and tough childhood card would not make me budge an inch. If you break the law, you should pay.

[kitkat1971]

Apr 25, 2018 20:33:54 GMT CAEF said:

But Grant's PTSD is not an excuse to beat people up. If I was a judge I would make no allowances for PTSD sufferers if they committed serious crimes. I'd still have them pay for their actions. The PTSD card and tough childhood card would not make me budge an inch. If you break the law, you should pay.

I didn't mean it was an excuse, more that there was a point to it in terms of building a multi faceted character.

He wasn't violent because he was some major gangster and needed people to be scared of him, he was violent due to his experience in the Army and had no control over it when the red mist descended.