Just caught up with the rest of last night’s offal offering. (“Why?”, I hear you ask) and my first reaction was to agree with Tony; it’s the will SL recycled.
But then I remembered the details of that SL. This is a complete U-turn; Peggy has never supported anything to do with environmentalism or sustainability—as she took great pleasure in pointing out to Tony. Quite the contrary—she was totally behind Brian’s profit before all philosophy.
For one thing, I don’t believe for a minute that Peggy would have resorted to that rallying cry of performative wokeness, ‘the right side of history’ (no love, you’re the wrong side of ninety).
There was another glaringly out-of-register expression put in her mouth too, but I cannot at present remember it.
LA? Not Pygmalion Likely.
I tend to feel that if I recognise the name of a new writer or actor for TA, the chances are they won’t be as good as someone for whom TA is important because it is what they have got, and who therefore works his or her socks off for the programme.
Some of the actors are notable exceptions: David Troughton is good. (His son not so much so). Kim Durham was good. um…
William Troughton is actually a fine actor. Unfortunately, because he was shoehorned into TA for apparently no other reason than SOC getting a few tabloid headlines about a father and son being played by a father and son, he seems to be trying to play the role as Tom Graham did (thereby making a mockery of the decision to recast). Instead of “William Troughton as Tom Archer”, we’re getting “William Troughton’s Impression of Tom Graham as Tom Archer”. Small wonder the actual acting suffers.
I see what you mean joe but, as you said recently, Emerald O’Hanrahan managed to sound like the ‘old’ Emma right from the moment she took over, while still making a brilliant job of acting the part. And I don’t believe she was a ‘name’ at the time?