Sometimes you just gotta let it out because keeping it lock up inside does you no good, Pam was exactly who Ben needed to help him as she knows what Ben has been through with Paul.
Pam is such a nice lady. I love that she and Ben gained a strong friendship after Paul died. I hope Pam returns this year as part of Ben's eating disorder story.
The amazing thing about Pam as played by Lin Blakley is that she has deeply lovely and realistic and watchable chemistry with both her Bens so far, and probably would with any future Ben actor too. The characters both click so perfectly, and Lin plays Pam so well, that it almost doesn't matter who plays Ben (no disrespect to Max and his brilliant performances, of course).
Nice to see Pam Coker back for a one-off guest appearance to support her once former sort-of grandson-in-law: Ben (the grandmother of his previous partner the late Paul Coker, before he got hitched to Callum).
Callum being attacked like that reminded Ben of how Paul died. Ben loved Paul and Paul loved Ben. They adored each other. They were in love with each other madly in love with each other and then Paul's killer killed him in front of Ben. And Paul's mother Pam Coker always had this understanding of Ben. And she knows when he needs Paul's mother. All it takes is one call from someone like Ben's mother Kathy Beale and Pam Coker is at Ben's side.
I like Pam but Kathy should be the one to comfort her son. What was the point of bringing her back when she ignores her kids? She’s not remotely bothered about Ian’s whereabouts either!
They seem to be really flip-flopping with the writing with this character. Is he to be the hard-man successor to the Mitchel Criminal gang or not? One moment he's trying to kill Keanu or hanging Martin over a bridge and the next he's struggling with his feelings etc. Feels like the Mitchell gang will end when Steve McFadden is too old to pull off that sort of role.
Tbf he didn't manage it, EE have a ton of boundaries and plot armour when it comes to gangster characters and storylines and writers are very reluctant to hit the accelerator.
@@tomhiggins6542 I was always a sad when they killed off the Johnny Allen character. Billy Murray is great and with the write plots can pull off a believable villain. As for Mitchell criminal clan, I think it ends with Phil Mitchell, and Steve McFadden is looking less and less believable in this role.
@@thecomputingchronicles again writers dropped the ball with some great potential. The problem with Jonny is that he was too nice, dominated by Phil & Grant and actually came of as the victim when I don't think he was supposed too, frequently verbally & physically provoked by other characters on the show, the amount of chances he blew to kill The Mitchell's was similar to Sideshow Bob/Bart Simpson, handed himself in to the police to stop Ruby having a tantrum and was brought back later on to foolish against Sean...this was supposed to be the most feared man in London but it looked like a mild man who got pushed into a corner.
This is hard to watch. Is Ben really a Mitchell? He needs to man up. Feels like the Mitchell clan will come to an end once Phil becomes too old to carry the torch. The Mitchell's have been the hard-man family since the start. Their unsympathetic nature and lack of empathy for others is what has made them an iconic family within the square - they are the traditional pantomime villains of the piece. You do get that? Steve McFadden isn't getting any younger and Ben supposedly is the successor of the Mitchell clan but I don't think that character will have the same draw and appeal over the next 20 years like Phil & Grant have because they've made him too much of a real-world character. It's right that Eastenders write about real-world stories like abuse etc that affect people but you can't really do that with your lead villains. Nick Cotton. Johnny Allen, Derek Branning, Trevor Morgan all drew the audiences in because of those very qualities. Would any of those characters have the same appeal if they were getting hugs from Pam and showed a more sympathetic side or vulnerable side? of course not! This is why people are fascinated by East End criminals like Billy Hill, Frankie Fraser, The Richardson's, The Sabini's, because of their ruthless nature. So yes I do believe the Mitchell clan is coming to an end as this character simply won't prove the draw Grant & Phil were whilst he's getting hugs from Pam. They can bring in temporary villain's like Gray but they need a thread of villainy of one family that goes through the years which is what the Mitchell's gave.
@@tomhiggins6542 Feels like any character in a role too long becomes a little like a pantomime character over time. Depends I guess, when it comes to crooks, do folk want to see unfeeling criminals in a show or delve into a more human side? What's believable? In terms of the Mitchells is Ben's character a believable successor as head of the Mitchell criminal clan or does that end with Phil? It feels with Ben's character they've flip flopped around with it a lot. There was a spell when they made him more hard-nosed and it felt like he could even take over from Phil but then they will show a vulnerable side. I liked Paul Usher's Danny Hardcastle character as he's a believable crook
@@thecomputingchronicles I liked Paul Usher Barry Grant but this was too watered down, EE don't have the same balls when it comes to writing these parts that HO do and showed here and was kinda brought in so Phil could run him out of town. Your right about Nick and Phil been ruined by staying on too long but Jonny became too nice too soon and actually of as the victim when he wasn't supposed to.
@@tomhiggins6542 Yeah Brookside was quite edgy at times and I too liked the Barry Grant character. It feels like the EE writers have kind of given up and the default action to flagging viewers is to bring back an old pantomime villain like Janine. I just thought if they wanted to have any longevity in the Mitchells being the local villain's then Ben would need to take that role but by showing a softer more human side they are chiseling away at that credibility.
I love pam, she's the only person ben truly relies on emotionally. She's sort of Ben's mother or grandmother in the role she takes to support him
Love Pam how she shows mother and son bond even if they aren't related
Sometimes you just gotta let it out because keeping it lock up inside does you no good, Pam was exactly who Ben needed to help him as she knows what Ben has been through with Paul.
Pam's an angel such a sweet character
Happy to see that Pam is back, even if it is temporarily.
Pam is such a nice lady. I love that she and Ben gained a strong friendship after Paul died. I hope Pam returns this year as part of Ben's eating disorder story.
They should bring her back full time I always loved her in EastEnders
pam and ben have such a sweet freind ship after evething they been through
Nice to see pam back
I loved Pam she shouldn’t left eastenders
The amazing thing about Pam as played by Lin Blakley is that she has deeply lovely and realistic and watchable chemistry with both her Bens so far, and probably would with any future Ben actor too. The characters both click so perfectly, and Lin plays Pam so well, that it almost doesn't matter who plays Ben (no disrespect to Max and his brilliant performances, of course).
💖💖💖 Pam!!! Poor Ben has PTSD. 😢😢
I love Pam, she has a heart of gold. I also wish Les was there. If they came back permanently, that would be amazing.
Nice to see Pam Coker back for a one-off guest appearance to support her once former sort-of grandson-in-law: Ben (the grandmother of his previous partner the late Paul Coker, before he got hitched to Callum).
Callum being attacked like that reminded Ben of how Paul died. Ben loved Paul and Paul loved Ben. They adored each other. They were in love with each other madly in love with each other and then Paul's killer killed him in front of Ben. And Paul's mother Pam Coker always had this understanding of Ben. And she knows when he needs Paul's mother. All it takes is one call from someone like Ben's mother Kathy Beale and Pam Coker is at Ben's side.
I love Pam 🥰🤗
As soon as I saw Pam, I thought if babe lol
This was a Nice supprise
I know Ben isn’t a good person but I felt bad for him in this episode
Yeah same
Pam loves Ben as much as she loved Paul.
I like Pam but Kathy should be the one to comfort her son. What was the point of bringing her back when she ignores her kids? She’s not remotely bothered about Ian’s whereabouts either!
Poor Ben
Oh, bless her.
I always liked Pam Coker.
0:25 think what she said is a bit inaccurate
@Tyler Power lol very funny weren’t it ha
@Tyler Power ye
@Tyler Power so have you most people In the comments are normally really toxic but you are a kind person
@Tyler Power course
@Tyler Power oh no is that why
Didn't stop Ben from trying to kill Keanu
They seem to be really flip-flopping with the writing with this character. Is he to be the hard-man successor to the Mitchel Criminal gang or not? One moment he's trying to kill Keanu or hanging Martin over a bridge and the next he's struggling with his feelings etc. Feels like the Mitchell gang will end when Steve McFadden is too old to pull off that sort of role.
Tbf he didn't manage it, EE have a ton of boundaries and plot armour when it comes to gangster characters and storylines and writers are very reluctant to hit the accelerator.
@@tomhiggins6542 I was always a sad when they killed off the Johnny Allen character. Billy Murray is great and with the write plots can pull off a believable villain. As for Mitchell criminal clan, I think it ends with Phil Mitchell, and Steve McFadden is looking less and less believable in this role.
@@thecomputingchronicles again writers dropped the ball with some great potential. The problem with Jonny is that he was too nice, dominated by Phil & Grant and actually came of as the victim when I don't think he was supposed too, frequently verbally & physically provoked by other characters on the show, the amount of chances he blew to kill The Mitchell's was similar to Sideshow Bob/Bart Simpson, handed himself in to the police to stop Ruby having a tantrum and was brought back later on to foolish against Sean...this was supposed to be the most feared man in London but it looked like a mild man who got pushed into a corner.
@@tomhiggins6542 that scene with Sean in the prison was just rubbish. Billy Murray could have pulled off a great role there.
How's Christine 😁
Paul gets killed, Callum gets beat up and Jay gets left in the van...I think Ben's had it fairly easy
I think Jay being left in the van affected Ben the most.
And Ben had to watch/experience all of it and still be the one to survive. PTSD and survivors guilt.
Ben Michel. Pau milchell. CONNOR Katy Perry last Vegas party 🎊
I wished they never got rid of pan
Pam should stay!
This is hard to watch. Is Ben really a Mitchell? He needs to man up. Feels like the Mitchell clan will come to an end once Phil becomes too old to carry the torch.
The Mitchell's have been the hard-man family since the start. Their unsympathetic nature and lack of empathy for others is what has made them an iconic family within the square - they are the traditional pantomime villains of the piece. You do get that?
Steve McFadden isn't getting any younger and Ben supposedly is the successor of the Mitchell clan but I don't think that character will have the same draw and appeal over the next 20 years like Phil & Grant have because they've made him too much of a real-world character.
It's right that Eastenders write about real-world stories like abuse etc that affect people but you can't really do that with your lead villains.
Nick Cotton. Johnny Allen, Derek Branning, Trevor Morgan all drew the audiences in because of those very qualities. Would any of those characters have the same appeal if they were getting hugs from Pam and showed a more sympathetic side or vulnerable side? of course not!
This is why people are fascinated by East End criminals like Billy Hill, Frankie Fraser, The Richardson's, The Sabini's, because of their ruthless nature.
So yes I do believe the Mitchell clan is coming to an end as this character simply won't prove the draw Grant & Phil were whilst he's getting hugs from Pam.
They can bring in temporary villain's like Gray but they need a thread of villainy of one family that goes through the years which is what the Mitchell's gave.
Deleted comment 😂
tbh Nick and Derek were kinda panto, Jonny was too nice and Trevor was involed in real issues (unlike Grey where writers have lost control).
@@tomhiggins6542 Feels like any character in a role too long becomes a little like a pantomime character over time. Depends I guess, when it comes to crooks, do folk want to see unfeeling criminals in a show or delve into a more human side?
What's believable? In terms of the Mitchells is Ben's character a believable successor as head of the Mitchell criminal clan or does that end with Phil?
It feels with Ben's character they've flip flopped around with it a lot. There was a spell when they made him more hard-nosed and it felt like he could even take over from Phil but then they will show a vulnerable side.
I liked Paul Usher's Danny Hardcastle character as he's a believable crook
@@thecomputingchronicles I liked Paul Usher Barry Grant but this was too watered down, EE don't have the same balls when it comes to writing these parts that HO do and showed here and was kinda brought in so Phil could run him out of town. Your right about Nick and Phil been ruined by staying on too long but Jonny became too nice too soon and actually of as the victim when he wasn't supposed to.
@@tomhiggins6542 Yeah Brookside was quite edgy at times and I too liked the Barry Grant character. It feels like the EE writers have kind of given up and the default action to flagging viewers is to bring back an old pantomime villain like Janine. I just thought if they wanted to have any longevity in the Mitchells being the local villain's then Ben would need to take that role but by showing a softer more human side they are chiseling away at that credibility.