Tuesday, 13 July 2010

There are several words that rhyme with Nick...


One of those words starts with P and one starts with D. Neither are flattering. It's not as if the character of Nick Tilsley wasn't already sinking lower and lower in my eyes before now. He's a jumped up Mike Baldwin Wannabe with a poker up his backside and a nasty temperment, at least with his workers. He's using Natasha, clearly not that into her but letting her go on and on planning their future together when he has no intentions of sticking with her for the long run. But last night, he was sucking up to Leanne and then complaining because Carla gave him a taste of his own medicine and then asked her if she ever wondered if she ever pictured them together with a baby of their own...HOW FLAMIN' DARE HE!!??

If that isn't the epitome of bad taste, and quite a few other bad words that I can't use on a family blog.... You cannot imagine how much ranting I did last night watching this. I was absolutely gobsmacked that Nick would stoop so low and ask Leanne so thoughtless a question after *he* was the one that insisted she abort their baby when they were married and *still* scarpered off to Canada leaving her to deal with the breakup and her emotions on her own. What an Arse! And that's a polite way of putting it. He is officially my most hated character now! He might be a Baldwin pretender but he most certainly doesn't have the charm that Mike had to go along with it. He's just a lowlife. A selfish, whining, slimy sleezeball!!

I rest my case.

13 comments:

Chewy said...

I agree! Glad Leanne told him where to stick it, Mike was twice the man Nick is (I like how they brought up that he wants to be like him)

Flaming Nora said...

He's horrible but such a good character!

Tvor said...

Oh yes, the character is well played by Ben Price, i do agree with that.

Kate said...

I couldn't agree more. I can't stand seeing him on screen anymore and the way he treats Natasha is horrendous! I find the factory storyline with Carla boring as well. I miss the old Nick!

Chewy said...

Old Nick as in Adam Rickett? God no...I hated that version of the character, it was obvious he was there because of his looks, and not his acting skills

Cobblestone said...

I agree with this assessment of Nick's character; but can I just ask, what the hell happened to continuity in the unfolding Underworld saga? Carla insisted that Paul Slater was an Underworld client and therefore Nick was breaking the law in poaching him. WRONG! Carla (with Too-Tall-Trev in tow) ballsed up the deal with Slater and he said he was going elsewhere. It was Nick whio brought him back to the table and clinched the deal, but only AFTER Tony had blown Underworld sky-high. Carla ("Who's Carla?") never had any claim on that deal. Furthermore, Slater initially cancelled the deal with Nick when he realised the factory was a burnt-out shell, so how come he's happy to give the next order to Carla who is in exactly the same situation as Nick was then? This plot strand makes no sense whatsoever. For God's sake, writers, pull it together!

Frankie said...

yeah the actor is great but i wouldn't mind, however you do have to worry about gails way of bringing up her children, i.e Nick.. 'well hes a not nice guy'
Sarah.. 'preganet at 16 and she had a attertuid.
David... well where to begin
lol :)
sorry about the spelling!

Coronation Street Corner said...

Sarah, pregnant at 13!

abbyk said...

@Cobblestone, even though Nick brought Slater back post-fire, if he were originally an Underworld client pre-Nick or if Nick brought him in while working at Underworld, he became an UW client. Carla is too smart a cookie not to have a non-compete clause drawn into the partnership agreement. If the partnership broke up, Nick would be prohibited for soliciting work from UW clients for a specified period of time, usually a year.

He's treating Natasha horribly. Leanne, arghhhh! And Carla, please keep kicking him in the shins.

Chewy said...

Wasnt it Paul Stokes that Nick poached?

Clare said...

"A word."
"Is it sorry? Cos if it's not then i've got two words back for you."

Carla hit the nail on the head, Bleep off Nick.

seapenguin said...

My line of the week/month/year is (cut to Nick) "Prostitution Leanne? but how?"

Cobblestone said...

But that's my point, abbyk; Paul Stokes (thanks, Chewy, it is Stokes, not Slater) REFUSED to give his business to Underworld when he discovered Carla & Trev were messing him about in the Rovers. Nick had to reign him back in, post-fire. No contract had ever been exchanged between Stokes and Underworld/Carla (and he was Nick's contact in the first place). I appreciate that when Nick originally went about trying to get him back, he acting as an Underworld representative, but by the time he got set up in Turners and landed the contract, he and Stokes were joking about "Who's Carla?" Seems to me this may be a matter of business ethics, but not of law.

You might also like...