You’d be hard put to find a less sharp tool than a Grundy
She caused it to happen, and now she shows every sign of causing it to happen again.
Eddie’s “You’re not on your own any more” was unusually insightful. It would have been more so had he realised why William felt (rightly) he was on his own.
The SL is not helped by key scenes being given to two of the worst actors in the cast.
If Clarrie goes on the way she is, he’ll soon wish he was on his own!
I imagine you’re referring to Clarrie and Will. Tell me, what do you think of Trevor Harrison? I’m reading a lot of praise - elsewhere - for his acting but I’m not that impressed. There’s a tone that he uses when doing ‘sincere’ that sounds terribly false when it should sound genuine. I mean, he uses the same unctuous tone that he employs when Eddie is trying to scam someone.
Not a lot, to be honest—at least, not as Eddie. Then again, the character’s too much of a stereotype to do anything with. I’m trying to remember how he fared in The Canterbury Tales. I remember being pleasantly surprised at how well that was done. Admittedly, I was expecting the worst, so any bit of quality would probably have scored fairly highly, but I was genuinely impressed with the whole production. Billing it as “The Archers does Chaucer” was a mistake, frankly; it probably turned off as many listeners as they hoped it would bring in. It would have been better as a straightforward Classic Serial production (which is what it was, after all).
But isn’t that what Eddie would do? I mean, he hasn’t any other tone he’d use, has he? So TH using the same one is actually right, even if that is counter-intuitive.
No, I don’t agree. There’s that false, smarmy tone he uses when trying to put one over on someone that I don’t think a real Eddie would use when trying to talk his son out of suicide. Whereas in TA I find the actor’s tone identical for the two situations.
By the way, I noted that I’d made a typo in my own post because you quoted from it and I was curious to see, if I corrected it, whether it would correct itself in quote in your post. No, it didn’t. ‘Unctuous’ remains ‘unction’ in the quote, whereas the original is corrected.
That’s good, actually, because then one can’t say ‘I never said that’ when the quote is there for all to see.
Though, to be fair, one can put disgusting words in someone’s mouth:
and it takes someone clicking on the arrow to see that I’ve mucked about with it.
You are a devious wee birdie, how did you do that?
Same way I did just then: change a word in the bit being quoted, where it appears in the reply-box.
Ha, let’s give it a go.
This could cause untold confusion! Lucky we are such law-abiding citizens … I think.
heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh
Will you lot please BEHAVE??
Experience suggests “probably not”, ma’am.
But, but, but… it’s me natural optimism and unfailingly cheerful outlook talking. Sorry.
Other sites - naming no names - are open to quote-tampering. Not that one would do such a thing, obviously
We are being have, Gus.