The Big Week, The Big Reveal

Wow! ITV really pulled out all the stops this week, didn't they? There were a few smaller fill-in storylines but mostly it was one major surprise after another. Big things were revealed, one or two which were superbly timed.

First we had Ken remembering Daniel was his assailant. The viewer knew by the end of last week and watched as Daniel quickly fell apart, guilt, pain, long held damage and resentment, it was all there as he attacked his father but wait, the door opens, that bookcase blocking the way shudders as someone tries to push through...just as Ken is accusing Daniel of killing his mother, his mother shows up on the other side of the door! I knew Denise would be back in the show but I had no idea it would be just then. Excellent stuff! Now to find out why she left and why she stayed away. A breakdown? That lasted for 6 years? And she had no friends at all in the  world she could send to check up on him?

Denise's reveal was that she'd had a breakdown and stayed away because she thought he'd be better off without her and still believes it. If she could see throught he walls of that bathroom to see her son trying to cut himself, scald his hands and shake and cry in a little heap in the corner, maybe she'd rethink that statement. *I* wanted to smack her for that. Daniel was about to have that discussion with his mother when he finally came out but the police showed up. Sinead had found the bloody book and oh too familiar inscription and the penny dropped there, too. But in the end, it was her that called the police.

Daniel turns himself in. I wonder if he could claim temporary insanity because he certainly is a damaged boy, no thanks to his mother. The detective is  practically spitting coins because Ken won't press charges. I didn't expect he would so that wasn't a surprise. Now the way forward is to find a way to help him. I think this was my favourite of the big stories this week, because I've been following it with great interest from the first, spellbound especially by Rob Mallard's performances.

Next up, Craig inadvertently revealed to Shona exactly who Bethany's boyfriend really is. Nathan was the ex that Shona was running from at Christmas, the ex that she has told people abused her, with at least one burn scar to prove it. When she confronted Nathan, she got away but was attacked and left for dead. Craig proves yet again to be the hero and rescues her, just days after helping a lost Bethany.

Nathan is feeding Bethany drugged drinks, just enough to keep her pliant but she kicked off so he dragged her outside and wielded his control by shouting, physically burning her arm and then blaming his actions on her. Typical abuser. She'll do anything to make up to him now, convinced she caused his anger. This really is painful to watch, painful in that your heart breaks for her.  The next reveal was Shona managing to get out of the hospital to warn the Platts about what Nathan was doing with Bethany sending them running en masse to rescue her.

They weren't in time to prevent the 3-on-1 in the bedroom, which was quite chilling to see, those men filing into the room behind her and Mel ensuring she stayed there. I didn't expect that. It's one thing to imply that she's heading into the bedroom and has had sex with a crooked copper, it's quite another thing to put her in a Three Men and a Bethany situation, even if it is after the watershed early air time but they went there, apparently. Bethany was "rescued" though she doesn't see it that way and refuses to take against Nathan. But I wonder if, at the end of the last episode when she looked at the burn on her arm and then her engagement ring, a little flash of doubt passed her mind. Just for a brief moment. One more reveal, Shona told the police that she ran away from Nathan when she realized what Nathan was trying to do so it sounds like she wasn't used sexually after all.


The thing is, now that we know Nathan's cohort in the whole scheme is a police officer, it's going to make things more difficult to prosecute him even when he was arrested at the flat. I'm not sure where the raid came from but I suspect one of the Platts probably called them while on the way. This ongoing story has been very interesting to watch, too, even if the subject matter is difficult. This happens. It's important because it might help someone. And, again, the performances, especially by Lucy Fallon and Chris Harper as the creepy Nathan have knocked it out of the park.

Nick's a good man with the kids, really he is. He did try to help bring them all together for Simon's sake but couldn't resist getting into it with Peter yet again, trying to prove he's the better football player. With Simon walking away in disgust, Nick's in the bad books again. When Leanne overheard that he could have provided Peter with an alibi the night his father was attacked, that was the last straw. He was willing to say nothing if it would get Peter out of their lives, not caring what the effect on Simon would be. He says he trusts Leanne but he feels like he doesn't belong. He would if he was able to accept Peter and Steve and be a decent man instead of someone that always has to have all the prizes.

His lifelong sense of entitlement is his downfall. He's always taken advantage of Leanne when she's been vulnerable, knowing she always leans on him when she's been heart broken or let down. She's continually the one that gets away, that one that keeps leaving him when he messes up, trying to be her one and only. That's what happens when one person loves more than the other, when one person's definition of love is possession and triumph. He lost her again and knew it. Peter was a bit harsh, suggesting he throw himself into the sea. He didn't really consider it but he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and nearly drowned under the quicksand.

Peter was then the one that kept Nick talking, trying to make him angry enough to fight to live. It worked and Nick was rescued just in time. Acrimony aside, there was no way Peter nor Steve would ever let Nick drown if they could do anything to help or get assistance. Nick would do the same for either of them. I think. Nick says he wouldn't but I think if the situation was presented to him, he would. Don't forget that Nick saved Peter's life after the tram crash. Then again, he also lured Peter back to drinking afterwards and had been having an affair with Leanne who was engaged to Peter at the time. Peter, flawed as he is, is definitely the better man.

Previously, as far as spoilers went, it was left up in the air whether he'd survive or not. ITV was very cagey about it. They're getting a lot better and keeping some things back as surprises which is a good thing. We knew the actor was leaving, would they actually kill off Nick? I really didn't think so but it was a close call, wasn't it? Nail biting stuff.

In the end, Nick gave up and walked away. Leanne was ready to stay with him after nearly losing him but she was that close to walking away before that. If he hadn't nearly died, he wouldn't have changed his attitude and even if they got through that day, it would never have gone the distance. He knows that very well. He told his mother that he didn't like the man he was turning into, and he wasn't coming back. I can't think of anyone that needs a fresh start more than Nick Tilsley and maybe he'll even manage to get Leanne out from under his skin. Will he be gone forever? Probably not. I would imagine that they will recast Nick some day and bring him back.

But for now, that's the end of Nick on our screens. At least he said goodbye to his mum! Yet another really good storyline. As much as I really dislike Nick, the chemistry between Ben Price, Jane Danson and Chris Gascoyne especially just leaps off the screen. Georgia Taylor and Jane Danson still have that sibling dynamnic, too. While it might have felt a bit out of character for Leanne and Steve to have sex in the first place, it certainly kicked off a lot of drama and a long running storyline.

In the minor leagues, Cathy finally kisses Brian after him faffing around his superstitions for half the week. I fail to see what she sees in him. It's Anna's 50th birthday and Kevin's organized a surprise party for her with Erica's help in keeping Anna out of the house until the appointed time. Anna's still finding it difficult to get close to Kevin due to her low self esteem over her burns. Careful, luv, Kevin doesn't respond well to partners who find reasons to shy away from his advances, even if they're good ones. Just ask Sally.

What a week of Corrie! I think this was one of the best "big weeks" I have ever seen on Coronation Street.There wasn't a lot of lightness or fun, very little humour and mostly what there was of it, Brian's buffoonery and susperstition, was just annoying. I wanted to get back to the drama and there was plenty of that.


Tvor (Twitter @tvordlj)

Characters I "Love to Hate"

Brian Packham as back on Coronation Street and many fans are rejoicing. For me, it's a mixed bag of joy and dread. You see, I never liked Brian. He's a buffoon. He's selfish, greedy and boorish. He's an intellectual snob, even more so than Ken Barlow.  One scene that stands out in my mind was Brian, staying at Ken's, helped himself to Ken's kimono without asking. It never seemed to occur to him that he should have. Borrowing a shirt or a jumper would have been bad enough, but a dressing gown is a rather intimate garment and it made me cringe with disgust that he would think nothing of rooting through Ken's closet or laundry and doing it.

This week, we saw him apparently investigating the Bistro for Environmental Health but in reality, was just after a free meal. Never mind that the complaint would have been logged and his superiors would be looking for a proper report. Never mind that not only was he angling for a free meal, he managed to down THREE bowls of mussels. I'm surprised he didn't insist Robert hand him cash to get out of the investigation. If I was Robert, I'd be reporting him.

Brian is very much cut from a similar cloth to Derek Wilton and I never liked him either.

Both men had a nicer side, a softer side. They both loved and were loved. Derek and Mavis were soul mates even though he exasperated her many times (and probably, vice versa!). Julie and Brian seemed like a good couple and were very much in love but apparently, they did not go the distance. Soul mates they weren't in the end.  Both men were a bit hapless and not very good at what they did in spite of them both thinking quite highly of themselves and their abilities.

Another current character I never liked is Norris Cole who's a sanctimonious, gossipy and at times thoroughly nasty little man.  He, too, can pull his heart out of the cold storage now and then and be kind to someone when you least expect it but for the most part, I don't know why he has any friends at all.  When he was first on the show in the 90s he was a spiteful and arrogant piece of work. He's softened a little in his old age but he still has his backside firmly on that high horse.

The fourth current character that evokes a strong negative response in me is Pat Phelan. There is very little soft side to him, and I think there's a stone swinging in his chest where his heart should be. He's opportunistic, greedy, ambitious, controlling and he's a bully. He's a classic Corrie villain.

I would describe my feelings for Brian, Derek and Norris as "I really don't like them".  But I very much enjoy Pat Phelan as a character.  I really enjoy watching him. He's so bad, he's good! I don't know what the difference is unless it's the villain aspect. Villains are always more interesting.

The thing is, I like/liked to hate all four characters. This comes down to two things. The writing is usually great and the actors themselves are highly skilled. I think all four men put in top performances and that contributes to the "like to hate" syndrome. I have to admit, Norris is a bit of a struggle at times and I don't find him as funny as most people I know (though he does get in a great line now and then) but Brian and Derek can always make me laugh and Pat Phelan keeps me glued to the screen.  (going with the present tense here, even though Derek Wilton and his portrayer are no longer with us) The actors all have impeccable timing whether it's for comedy or drama.

There have been a lot of characters over the years that I've not liked much. What brings a viewer to like or dislike a character, and note, I said "character" not "actor", is generally subjective. The character is usually written specifically *to* be dislikeable or to have dislikeable characteristics but the viewer doesn't always agree. What one person finds dislikeable about, say, Brian Packham, someone else will find funny or intriguing.

Other "love to hate" characters over the years have included Cilla Battersby Brown,  Nessa, Reg Holdsworth, Nick Tilsley and Tracy Barlow.  I confess I really disliked Kate Ford in her first few years playing Tracy, but she's settled in and come a long way. The perceived skill of the actor makes a huge difference for me in whether I like to dislike a character or whether I really, really find them off-putting. There have been many over the years that I felt couldn't act their way out of a paper bag but I'm going to refrain from naming names.

Characters that you like to hate are usually interesting, intriguing, sometimes funny, sometimes tragic, sometimes both. Maybe they're a bit exaggerated but others might be very understated.  I think that once an actor proves their acting chops and makes a character their own, the writers can really play to their strengths which makes them so much more watchable. Apparently, the writing team had a ball writing for Maggie Jones who played Blanche Hunt due to her amazing delivery of those acerbic lines we all remember.

The writing and acting skill really do combine to make a character great, whether it be a hateful piece of work, a comedy stalwart, or an adored sweetheart of the Street.  When the character is all over the place, when their personalities are unfathomably transplanted, when it seems like the writers and producers don't know what to do with them, they stop being watchable and enter that dreaded realm of the forgettable. (Katie Armstrong, anyone?)

I'm all for Love to Hate characters that give us the comedy gold or the tension that has us on the edge of our seats.  Kudos to the actors behind the facades who bring the characters to life, creating the unforgettable.




Tvor (Twitter @tvordlj)

Julie and Brian - Mavis and Derek for the 21st Century?

He's a bit of a pompous windbag and she's daft as a brush. He takes his career as a teacher/headmaster seriously, she can drive her coworkers mad with her wittering and off the wall remarks.

I've often thought of these two as the new version of the classic Mavis and Derek. They have a lot of differences, of course, but there are also some similarities. I think the main reason I think of them this way is just an overall feeling. He's more Derek-like than she is Mavis-like but as a couple they are quirky and so odd that they are perfect for each other.

I do think Julie has a bit more to her than Mavis but she too was a wall flower without much luck with men for quite a long time. She's stronger, more forceful and perky than Mavis and she's most definitely a modern woman. She knows what she wants and can make a decision where neither Mavis nor Derek, as his mother said once, could tell the time in a room full of clocks. Julie has a wonderful personal style, too. Mavis was most definitely on the dowdy side but that was more to do with the generation, I think.

Brian is a bit stodgy, boorish, banal and even slightly repulsive. He seems to have his heart in the right place but he's not all that clever dealing with people. He's self centred and a bit of a prat and definitely not the most decisive of  men.  He just seems to me to embody an overall Derekish quality to him.

Together they embrace life with enthusiasm, whether it's UFO-spotting or impending parenthood. There was a rumour they would set up a fruit and veg market in the old Butcher shop and though that doesn't seem to be in the offing yet, with all this talk of healthy eating for the students and Brian's job seemingly on the line if he doesn't pull up the school's collective socks, it could still happen.

Whether you can see the spirit of the Wiltons in them or not, I think they're a classic Corrie couple. Both characters have the comic side to them which we need in the show. Brian was sublimely funny with John Stape-wick and it's too bad Stape's dead because Brian would have latched on to him as BFF rather than Ken and had us all in stitches. Mind you, I suppose he'd have driving John to another murder before long!

I thoroughly enjoy Julie and Brian's interaction with each other as a couple and look forward to more!