Without Eddie I wouldn't like it as much. At all.
Dan does need someone on his side.
How Not To Live Your Life - Series 1 Page 19
Quote: Aaron @ September 18 2008, 11:21 AM BSTI'm intrigued by all of the Eddie-praise, because he's the most pointless, third-rate, unnecessary ancillary character I recall seeing in any British sitcom. Ever. Apart from his role in this final episode, there was no apparent reason for his being present, no development of the character, in any way, shape, or form. IIRC, someone said that he wasn't present in the pilot, and only appeared during the series proper. I am miles far from surprised by this.
I disagree with that. Eddie plays a big role in the setup. He's the only one Dom can confined in and the only one who will help him. Basically his sidekick.
Also his good natured manner gives the sitcom much needed warmth. You can see that was done on purpose because everyone but Abby is a bit of a monster.
As a sub-character he doesn't need to grow although he does change, very slightly, from being a bit sceptical of Dom at the beginning to embracing him fully by the end. But even so, its not a requirement for subs to arc.
Quote: zooo @ September 18 2008, 11:37 AM BSTDan does need someone on his side.
Exactly.
Quote: ContainsNuts @ September 18 2008, 11:42 AM BSTI disagree with that. Eddie plays a big role in the setup. He's the only one Dom can confined in and the only one who will help him. Basically his sidekick.
Hm. Ok. I'm fairly sure that they could have found a better way of doing it than a whole new character who for me just doesn't "work", but fair point.
Quote: ContainsNuts @ September 18 2008, 11:42 AM BSTAlso his good natured manner gives the sitcom much needed warmth.
Disagree entirely.
Quote: Aaron @ September 18 2008, 11:46 AM BSTDisagree entirely.
Do you disagree that he brings warmth (friendliness) to the sitcom or disagree that its needed?
Eddie is the optimistic element or a cynical world - surely? I mean this would have been unnecessary I suppose it the Abby character had been played well. But even so she was the muse, the naive airhead. Don needed a likeable character to be on his side.
But he's not just a dramatic function I don't think. He's a fully formed oddball character in an oddball world, but the antithesis of Don. No?
Sorry, should have clarified, yes. I'm not entirely sure as to the extent to which it's needed (although there should be something, or the show would be completely unwatchable). But as far as I can see, the only warmth comes when Don is honest and admits that he does actually love Abby, and indeed when he gets hurt by her relationship with Karl. If anything, Eddie is worse than the rest of them, as his dim-wittedness leads one to feel that he's always about to say or do something to drop Don in it even more than he's already managed to himself.
I like either 4 main characters or two. So he is necessary. 
I don't like three.
It's just maths, people.
Quote: hotzappa11 @ September 17 2008, 12:37 PM BSTI also enjoyed the fake dinner party to. It's gradually become more enjoyable, but there's still room for improvement.
Also Isabel Fay
Me too by the way! She's the original abby I've worked out, on the paramount shorts where this sitcom was born - http://www.paramountcomedy.com/shortcuts/series.aspx?seriesID=9
I can't think of many times Eddie has dropped Don in it, if anything he looks after him as Don clearly can't. But that's just my view on it. A lot of Don's confessions about Abby are to Eddie so he's useful in that.
I certainly don't see him as the most pointless character ever. He's different to all of them and performs a useful role for Don. Also, I think the role is well performed.
Eddie doesn't need to be developed - that's the whole point about him - he's a bit weird and an enigma (I was actually slightly disappointed we learnt more about him in the last episode).
As is said above, Eddie also acts as a way of allowing Don to share his secrets with the audience... but even if the character added nothing in that respect, he makes me laugh and that's a good enough reason to justify his existence in the comedy IMHO.
Quote: zooo @ September 18 2008, 12:01 PM BSTI like either 4 main characters or two. So he is necessary.
I don't like three.
It's just maths, people.
Black Books used three main characters very effectively
Having said that, I do think Eddie is a vital part of this show.
Oh bugger, you're right.
I knew there'd be one! Dammit.
Fawlty Towers: Basil, Cybil, Polly.
Ah, Manuel. Bugger. Erm.
Ooh, Two Pints... has/had five.
As does My Family.
Blackadder The Third! Blackadder, Baldrick, and the Prince.
Then five must be the number to avoid.
And I'm not going to even try and count the main characters in 'Allo 'Allo!, but that could easily by an uneven number.
Although it could just as easily be an even number...
Anyway, we're going far off-topic now. Naughty us.
I'm hoping that there'll be a second series of Dan Clark's How Not To Live Your Life, but shan't be writing letters of complaint if there isn't one.