i still think tracey anne oberman [chrissie] stands out as one of the most compelling characters the show ever had, she came in at a time when Eastenders was in the doldrums and really helped to put it back on the map. Her acting was completely flawless and she totally carried alot of the 2005 era imho. Excellent storyline.
2004-05 weren’t the best years, I like the 2001-2006 era as a whole tbh, but 2004 & 2005 were probably the weakest years out of that era of the show, that said those years are still stronger than anything post 2012/13, 2016/17 were by far the weakest years in this century.
@@JayJay-nc7pr I will agree with you that 2004 was very weak but 2005 was 1 of the best years in the show's history imho-loved the entire Den demise and the aftermath and slow demise of Chriisie that went throughout that year.. 2006 and 07 were poor but then from xmas 07-xmas 10 the show was unreal. 11-13 were poor but I thought Treadmill Collins really turned the show around and 14-mid 16 with the Lucy storyline which was very good before Sean o'Connor ran the show into the ground for a solid year. It hasn't being bad in the past year.
@@anoncollins8226 07-10 was better because there was so much more and everything from xmas 07-xmas 10 was stellar before brian kirkwood stuck his claws into the show.
Chrissie blew her cover when she said "let's face it, you were the first woman in his life" after Sam said that Chrissie last told Den "I may not have been the first woman in your life but I'm definitely gonna be the last."
Not just that but it was the way it was said. Chrissie was too sure of herself here. She couldn't hide the malice in her voice when she said it. I think her problem was because Jake knew, she felt more comfortable and kept getting less convincing when she lied. She was at her most believable when trying to lie to Jake too. It kept her on her toes trying to keep him from finding out. If I was Chrissie, I would have left a few weeks ago, told Sharon to run the pub claiming I couldn't be there any longer and give by lawyer the power to accept bids and sell the pub on my behalf. That way she could have been lying on a beach all this time. The only problem with that would be to keep convincing Sharon but at that point Chrissie would be happy on a beach somewhere with Jake waiting for the money to come through on the sale of the pub and if an arrest warrant was eventually put out for Chrissie, she wouldn't be in the country.
Saskia Mori No she didn’t but because Sam claimed Chrissie said those exact words about Sharon and then she actually did. It’s not medical evidence but it’s verbal proof that Sam didn’t do it but Chrissie did.
If I were Chrissy I would've been outta Walford MONTHS ago! Rented the pub out until I could sell it and draw the cash whilst I was living in Europe or South America it's no way I'd remain behind, furthermore, while the years 2004 & 2005 weren’t the best years for the show, Den, Sharon, Dennis and especially Chrissy were definitely the driving force behind those years, I generally enjoy EastEnders during the early to mid 2000s (more specifically 2001-06) but I do agree that 2004-05 were weaker, but what kept it going was the whole Shannis storyline, how Den reacted to it, how Den regained Albert Square only for him to lose it all again so soon after, Chrissy Watts is by far one of the best characters EE has ever come up with, what I found compelling about 2001-06 era was that the Mitchell’s were barely in the show, Peggy and Phil were off screen for much of the mid 00s (2003-05) It was definitely the “Days of the Watts” all over again, EE started going down hill around 2011/12 but 2016-18 were the driest, most boring years of the show ever, it was like after the 30th anniversary the writers didn’t know what to do, 2004-05 was much better in comparison
''EE started going down hill around 2011/12 but 2016-18 were the driest, most boring years of the show ever, it was like after the 30th anniversary the writers didn’t know what to do,'' You can usually link a decline/improvement in qulity by the producer who is in charge. Yea it went downhill in 11 as Brian Kirkwood stepped in for Diedrick Santerin 2010 and the decline in quality became very obvious from around xmas 10 when Kirkwood and his successors made a mess of the show for several years until DTC stepped in in 2013. I think that after the 30th anniversary the show still had a very decent 2015 which continued into 2016 when DTC bowed out, you can see then from around summer 2016 the show became a mess with the O'Connor guy behind it.
i still think tracey anne oberman [chrissie] stands out as one of the most compelling characters the show ever had, she came in at a time when Eastenders was in the doldrums and really helped to put it back on the map. Her acting was completely flawless and she totally carried alot of the 2005 era imho. Excellent storyline.
2004-05 weren’t the best years, I like the 2001-2006 era as a whole tbh, but 2004 & 2005 were probably the weakest years out of that era of the show, that said those years are still stronger than anything post 2012/13, 2016/17 were by far the weakest years in this century.
@@JayJay-nc7pr I will agree with you that 2004 was very weak but 2005 was 1 of the best years in the show's history imho-loved the entire Den demise and the aftermath and slow demise of Chriisie that went throughout that year.. 2006 and 07 were poor but then from xmas 07-xmas 10 the show was unreal. 11-13 were poor but I thought Treadmill Collins really turned the show around and 14-mid 16 with the Lucy storyline which was very good before Sean o'Connor ran the show into the ground for a solid year. It hasn't being bad in the past year.
Jay Jay I’d say 2004 & 2006 were the weakest years between that era followed by 2003
@@anoncollins8226 07-10 was better because there was so much more and everything from xmas 07-xmas 10 was stellar before brian kirkwood stuck his claws into the show.
@@anoncollins8226 2005 by far, 2007 was mostly boring until near the end when the affair was to be exposed.
Chrissie blew her cover when she said "let's face it, you were the first woman in his life" after Sam said that Chrissie last told Den "I may not have been the first woman in your life but I'm definitely gonna be the last."
SJMJ91 
SJMJ91 yeah. but she didn't know that Sam had told her about that sentence she said
Storytelling at its finest.
Not just that but it was the way it was said. Chrissie was too sure of herself here. She couldn't hide the malice in her voice when she said it. I think her problem was because Jake knew, she felt more comfortable and kept getting less convincing when she lied. She was at her most believable when trying to lie to Jake too. It kept her on her toes trying to keep him from finding out. If I was Chrissie, I would have left a few weeks ago, told Sharon to run the pub claiming I couldn't be there any longer and give by lawyer the power to accept bids and sell the pub on my behalf. That way she could have been lying on a beach all this time. The only problem with that would be to keep convincing Sharon but at that point Chrissie would be happy on a beach somewhere with Jake waiting for the money to come through on the sale of the pub and if an arrest warrant was eventually put out for Chrissie, she wouldn't be in the country.
Saskia Mori No she didn’t but because Sam claimed Chrissie said those exact words about Sharon and then she actually did. It’s not medical evidence but it’s verbal proof that Sam didn’t do it but Chrissie did.
If I were Chrissy I would've been outta Walford MONTHS ago! Rented the pub out until I could sell it and draw the cash whilst I was living in Europe or South America it's no way I'd remain behind, furthermore, while the years 2004 & 2005 weren’t the best years for the show, Den, Sharon, Dennis and especially Chrissy were definitely the driving force behind those years, I generally enjoy EastEnders during the early to mid 2000s (more specifically 2001-06) but I do agree that 2004-05 were weaker, but what kept it going was the whole Shannis storyline, how Den reacted to it, how Den regained Albert Square only for him to lose it all again so soon after, Chrissy Watts is by far one of the best characters EE has ever come up with, what I found compelling about 2001-06 era was that the Mitchell’s were barely in the show, Peggy and Phil were off screen for much of the mid 00s (2003-05) It was definitely the “Days of the Watts” all over again, EE started going down hill around 2011/12 but 2016-18 were the driest, most boring years of the show ever, it was like after the 30th anniversary the writers didn’t know what to do, 2004-05 was much better in comparison
''EE started going down hill around 2011/12 but 2016-18 were the driest, most boring years of the show ever, it was like after the 30th anniversary the writers didn’t know what to do,''
You can usually link a decline/improvement in qulity by the producer who is in charge. Yea it went downhill in 11 as Brian Kirkwood stepped in for Diedrick Santerin 2010 and the decline in quality became very obvious from around xmas 10 when Kirkwood and his successors made a mess of the show for several years until DTC stepped in in 2013. I think that after the 30th anniversary the show still had a very decent 2015 which continued into 2016 when DTC bowed out, you can see then from around summer 2016 the show became a mess with the O'Connor guy behind it.
I was rooting for Crissy!
Chrissie is wicked and evil. What she did to Sam was terrible. Chrissie is awful, and the sooner she's arrested the better. The jury's out for her.
go Sharon!