adam436

There was also Gypsy and Will in that period too, who I'd say were trashed by their return story. I think it's the way they've been used more so than how many have returned: Shelley Sutherland only appeared in a few scenes, despite Kirsty being in the show for 18 months Duncan Stewart - I have no issue with the recast, but more so the way he was used. Quinn Jackson - I can't recall how her previous stint ended, but from memory she's had nothing to do with Alf for 25 years and then suddenly shows up on his doorstep to dump her son on him. I applaud the producers for remembering she exists, but because of her and Alf's relationship, it was definitely a convivence thing more so than trying to bring back a legacy character. I've got no issue with recast, since she was only a minor character in her first stint. Dimitri - only a minor character so I'm not sure we can fairly count him here. It's great they got the original actor back, but I feel that comes down to Ada's relationship with Salvatore Coco and probably mentioned it to the producers moreso than the writers appeasing long-time fans. Celia was ruined by her return story I struggled with Olivia's return because she was the same age as VJ, who was born over 3 years later. I'd also say they threw James under the bus for the sake of the story too. Sally's return wasn't great - after all the tragedy in her life, it's a shame to think that continued after leaving Summer Bay Roo was recast, so essentially a new character for me. They share the same history, but I struggle to view them as the same character. That would be my argument if they recast Finn or Damien too, which I'm fine with to be honest if it gives Irene a purpose. Pippa's 2009 was not the best - Debra Lawrence explains why in the Soap from the Box podcast. As I said, I think it's the way those early years have been used upon their return. I think to fit into the current show, the returning characters have to be given such storyines in order to fit into the current format. Will, Gypsy and Celia are hardly going to return for a nostalgic visit to see Alf and Irene, are they? Which is fine if that's the producers' stance, but I'd rather such characters not return at all and live happily-ever-after then be brought back to be treated the way Will, Gypsy, Sally etc. were. It's not like there is a disproportionate number of returning characters from the Lucy Addario years anyway: we've only had Jett Palmer on a few occasions, Heath and Bianca (who I imagine have an open invitation to return because they are Braxtons), Angelo Rosetta and then Bella for Nikau's exit. It's not even like more recent characters like the Ben, Maggie, Willow, Brody, Raffy, Ryder, Olivia etc. ever returned for a visit after they left, despite having connections to the current characters. I found Marilyn's storyline quite offensive because much of her second stint revolved around her and Don trying to get pregnant and having a baby. It pretty much ruined her and Don's marriage for me in the same way the Martha secret did for Alf and Ailsa.

Tempany now lives in the US and Adam has left acting completely. I also doubt Steven would come back any time soon while there are two unrelated Mathesons around. The same could be argued for Frank Morgan too (we have Justin Morgan!), Roo's ex husband. He'd be a prime candidate too as it would give Roo a potential story and Alex Papps is still acting. I think the problem with characters returning for Alf's wedding was Martha's backstory. Having Duncan return for the wedding would mean that the writers would have had to address the fact that Ailsa existed and Alf lied to her for so long, and others like Fisher would need to address the fact that Martha left Bobby high and dry since Morag didn't know where to send the money to. The perfect opportunity for Fisher to return would have been Marilyn's amnesia story about 10 years ago when she thought she was still married to him. I always think it's a shame Lance never returned to visit Colleen in her final years when Marilyn was back. Lance is well and truly moved on, but they've actually never appeared onscreen together since 1990, despite both characters returning several times over the years. Lance began making sporadic appearances in 2000, just a few months after Emily Symons left and then he never appeared after 2006(?). I assume for Peter Vroom wasn't interested or was unavailable to return to return, since I assume he would have otherwise been back for Sally's or Colleen's exits, and he was a constant at reunion episodes up to the mid 2000s.

There was also the recast Duncan in 2016 too, who is pretty much brought in to drag out Tori/Nate, rather than provide a story for Alf and Roo. I also suspect many of those mainstay actors like Kate Ritchie and Debra Lawrence probably have little interest in returning to the current show either. I don't want the show to feature shoehorned returns or overkill volumes for anniversary specials like Neighbours, but it would be nice to acknowledge the past of existing characters at least. I'd like to see Irene's family acknowledged or even appear, especially since Finn's children are now the age of most of the cookie-cutter current characters. It would probably mean recasting Finn and Damien though, which I could live with. It would be less controversial than recasting Roo, and there are definitely actors of the right age would be a coup for the show.

Lynn's year level became the central school group by 1989 (Steven, Viv, Emma) so she would have had more to do then had she survived until then. I found her and Viv quite similar-natured, so it probably just would have meant forgoing Viv and Emma becoming Steven's main love interest I guess. Lynn also came from a large family, so there would have been scope to bring other siblings into the Fletcher household as needed, like they did with Will/Hayley/Nick and Finn/Damien later on.

I've only been watching Hollyoaks regularly since 2013 and seen older episodes available on Hollyoaks Favourites, but from what I understand the original premise of Hollyoaks was about a group of college students, and it has morphed into being about the characters in the village as a whole. Hollyoaks has recently had a new producer who has really shaken things up. The upcoming cast and episode reduction aside (I feel like that's a separate issue and not part of the changes currently playing out onscreen), she's axed a bunch of characters who were spare parts or didn't really add much, reintroduced the iconic Freddie Roscoe, started some intense but well-written teen issue stories (Frankie's abuse, Ro's transition, Lucas' sexuality) and completely shaken up some stories that were treading water and a bore to watch (the Sienna/Rafe/Dilly story being the prime example!). It's not all great though - many of the newer regulars aren't doing it for me and I've no interested in one of the main storylines at the moment (the Ste/Warren stuff), but on the whole it's really shaken things up and made it more exciting to watch. H&A could really benefit from something similar - perhaps part of me is still mourning the loss of the early years H&A and if I wasn't comparing it to that, I might enjoy it more, but I feel like the volume of cookie-cutter twentysomethings really limiting in terms of storylines. It's all relationship dramas or Lyrik stuff at the moment with not much else in between. It's pretty much a PG rated Secret Life of Us at the moment and it's not really working for me because the the PG rating is somewhat limiting and those more adult soaps have fewer episodes per year/week. I'd be curious to know what demographic H&A's audience is - if it's not teenagers and families anymore, I am starting to think that a move to a later-night timeslot would actually help to shake things up (keeping in mind it would still be available for streaming for those who don't watch it "live", so it might not be as damaging to viewership as people think!).

Still a happily-ever-after (at the time!) ending for Des that wasn't really needed. There were plenty of ways he could have left Erinsborough. I don't even remember Juliet or even how James left the show. I assumed he just had a quick and quiet exit since he was pretty much just a spare part without Chloe.

You could argue Mandy and Shannon too, though at least that was different to the standard exit. Donald Fisher and June was another, but that came in 2003 and was undone in a future guest stint anyway. I'm struggling to think of any others from that period right now. It was pretty standard in Australian soaps in the 80s and 90s though. Cathy Hayden, Brendan Jones and Maggie Sloan in A Country Practice, and then characters like Mrs Mangel, Des Clarke, Lance Wilkinson and Dorothy Burke in Neighbours are other examples.

I'd say the tried with the Sutherlands. They fostered Brodie Hanson, which I imagine was pretty much a nod to the former foster families of the past. Plus Rhys' nephew Max later on. We had a foster family unit again with Sally and Flynn, but that also felt short-lived due to Flynn dying so soon after moving in and the fact their only foster teens were dating at the time.

It made sense for Ailsa's shop to go when it did, regardless of the real-life issues. Yes it had a small diner area, but it wasn't very "hip", especially when Celia took over. It was very drab and it felt more like tearooms (I think Celia wanted to turn the flat into those, didn't she?) than a vibrant and happening hub for young people to meet made more sense. There was a conscious effort to make the show more appealing to young people in 1988/1989, so the introduction of the Bayside Diner fitted in with the youthful focus that came into play here. Celia's store was pretty much replaced with Alf's store anyway. This worked better - it was used less frequently than the General Store, and pretty much just used for the interactions between Alf and Marilyn or if we needed a chance meeting between two customers.

I've always said that 2000 was the end of classic H&A with the revamped theme and titles, cast changes and losing the iconic Diner and Stewart House sets, so I actually think Sally's wedding episodes would have made a great final episode. It was filled with many returnees, nostalgic reminiscing and a wedding (albeit a non-one) to bring the former cast and existing cast together. I recall the final scene of those episodes was Pippa walking through an empty Summer Bay House one last time (maybe with Sally?). The only thing that let those reunion down episodes down was that Judy Nunn was unavoidably missing, as she had fallen all and Nancy Hayes had stepped into the role, but that was obviously out of the control of the writers, producers and Judy herself. Had it been the actual final episode, I suspect we'd have seen more characters return than what we had. Apart from Jack Wilson, they were all from the 1988 season, which was having a re-run on Channel 7 at the time. We also had one of Alf's most iconic one-liners: What part of no don't you understand, the N or the O?

Especially after Charlotte had miscarried twins just a few weeks earlier too! The writers really piled it on with her at the end, didn't they?

I often feel like Executive Producers of soaps should have a limited appointment. If a new EP came in every 4-5 years, it would help soaps fresh as they come in with their own vision and ideas. The producers would obviously be subject to other pressures like budget, network influence etc. The producers of both Home and Away and Neighbours have been around for too long and the shows have suffered as a result. We've clearly had different eras of the show under Lucy (the Braxton era, the Morgans/Astoni era, the Parata era and currently Lyrik), but ultimately it's still the same show with crime, evil guest villains and relationship merry-go-rounds with the twenty and thirty somethings being the key themes of each. It's time for a change.

I guess other than Sally's almost-wedding, I don't remember the rest to be honest or considered them minor storylines. I feel like all of that except her PTSD and getting engaged to Luke was pre-Sutherland too. Alf felt very more like a supporting character after losing Ailsa, Duncan, Mitch and Shauna in quick succession. He was obviously the unofficial town sherrif, but he felt like a spare part until he got a new family with Ric, Martha, Morag and Sally. He obviously had the brain tumour story, but that's the only noteworthy story between 2001 and 2005ish. I wish I remembered Don's PTSD too, simply because I know Norman would have smashed it.

1995-2000 did seem to use the remaining original cast members more than what they did in 1990-1994, during which they were largely supporting characters. Sally was old enough to have more adult storylines as she moved into adulthood, Don was given more to do following Rebecca's return and being paired with Marilyn, and as we already mentioned, Ailsa and Alf were pushed to the forefront more with their storylines. Alf, Don and Sally were all sidelined again in the early 2000s with the arrival of the Sutherlands though.

The irony is that I suspect Judy Nunn decided to leave because they were giving her too many storylines and she wasn't getting as much downtime. In 1998-2000 there was the Diner shooting (was the fallout from that when she shot Alf?), the car accident that left her in a coma/hating Alf and then the Shauna story. That's probably more than what she got in all of 1990-1997. It's a shame she didn't negotiate to go part-time (or maybe she did, and an agreement couldn't be reached?), but the show was also going through a bit of a revamp at that time, so maybe it suited them for Ailsa to go too. Who knows? Ailsa became quite watered down after the first season (along with many others!). She was a strong survivor in 1988, having survived her father's abuse, a prison stint and stood up to the harassment of Roo, the Macklins and whomever else. In later years she seemed to breakdown over the Diner break in, the Diner siege, her car accident, post-natal depression and probably others I've missed.

From what I understand, Craig was poached from Neighbours, so it's interesting he didn't stay. I guess these days the show would sign actors on for 3 years, but Craig probably had the negotiating power if he was poached. Were contracts generally shorter in the early days? The majority of the original cast were gone in less than 3 years, and then we had a number of regulars like Viv, Emma, Karen, Ryan, Haydn etc. that didn't stay long. It would make sense, since no one could have predicted how long the show would last.

That's a good point. When you compare them to other married/long-term couples: Alf and Ailsa separated at least twice - in 1988 and then later in the nineties. I can't remember the circumstances of the latter, but Alf ended up moving into a caravan that caught fire and he had a friendship with a blind woman played by Belinda Giblin. I don't recall them coming back together in either of those circumstances being a slowburn type thing. Most other separations in the early years are usually done because one half of the couple is leaving the show (i.e. Joel and Natalie, Don and Marilyn), so there was no need to write the reconciliation arc.

I meant it in a were they more supporting characters or were they thrown in the deep end straight away. They were very much main characters by 1995, but I know Damien, Tug, Sarah etc. were all still around for some of 1994, so I wasn't sure if the newcomers were eased into things while the others were still around. That question has been pretty much answered now though. That period was a mess. The dramatic stuff was poorly written: there was some strange stories like the Zac/Pippa where everyone (Tom, and the residents of Summer Bay!) were so quick to jump to the conclusion that Pippa was having an affair, and details of Emma's introduction were sort of brushed over - Emma dealing her with abuse and Ailsa's relationship with her sister could and should have been major storylines in their own right, but were pretty much sidelined, presumably because they wanted to integrate Dannii Minogue into the show as quickly as possible. The highlight was probably the Danny story, and even that was poorly written at times. Justin Connor was amazing and played the part really well (from googling the actor, it sounds like his career was cut tragically short!) and I actually found him a scarier villain than Dodge or the Summer Bay Nutter. I just found the story, especially the ending, quite rushed, possibly because they had limited time before Cornelia Frances' contract ended. Then there was the the ridiculous stuff like the Summer Bay Bunyip, the mouse(?) funeral, the hotdog stand shenanigans and the pop band stuff with Martin, Lance and Marilyn. I can't remember the sausage mix up or the netball matches though. We had Lance, Martin, Celia, Floss and Neville (the latter two already gone by this point!) take on most of the lighter stuff in 1988, but they were always very much B plots, whereas in this period they were dragged out far too long and in the case of the pop band, treated as a major story. I also don't think it helped that Tom and Pippa barely had any screen time together in their last months - Tom sent to a city hospital for months to recover from a stroke, then there is a few weeks overlap where they are pretty much fighting the whole time over Tom's post-stroke attitude and her suspected affair before she disappears to care for her sick parents. Then Pippa returns shortly before Tom's death, where from what I recall, they were pretty much just fighting again.

The Donna and Angel stories you mentioned were definitely in 1995, but I wasn't even aware of the Tug one. I found Michael and Pippa's seperation quite boring too (I only watched from very late 1994, wmso maybe missed some of the build up), but perhaps that's because I wasn't overly invested in them as characters. I've not watched much of 1994, but how much did Shannon, Selina, Jack and Curtis do in 1994? They all had massive stories and took centre stage in 1995, but I assumed 1994 was a bit of a transition year between the teen groups, with both groups sharing the screen.

I felt like the show needed it though. I must admit I've never watched the 1994 season, but from what I understand it is thought to be one of the dullest periods of the show. I'm not sure if Australian or UK ratings reflected that though. I'm sure it would have alienated some viewers, but it also probably wouldn't be around today if it hadn't have made the move. I, for one, did not bother with mid 1990 through to early 1995 when the show was rerun on 7Two because I found it a little dull. I know there were some big moments in there, but not much of note in between. I'm struggling to think of many "lighter" moments in 1995 to be honest. There was the country music competition with Irene and Donna, but that was very early in the year, before the changes had really taken their full effect.

Not to mention the end of the original Diner and Stewart house too!

I felt the same, mostly because the "iconic moments" episodes were also pretty much a Summer gimmick too. And even that was heavily skewed toward the Lucy Addario years, with the deaths of later-years guest characters like Danny Braxton, Beth Ellis, Tommy, Stu Henderson and Ross Nixon valued equally with the deaths of Bobby, Tom, Shane, Michael and Ailsa. I did hold onto a bit of vain hope we might see more episodes released though, as I thought if it were a Summer gimmick, they'd have opted for the full 2011 season (the beginnings of the River Boys) over the 1988 season because it has been said in the past that Channel 7 or the producers are choosing to downplay H&A's age. What's even more odd is that we have all episodes of eighties soap Sons and Daughters available, and I would have thought demand for classic H&A would be much higher than that. Nothing against Sons and Daughters, but I do feel like it has a limited audience and lower popularity compared to classic H&A and many of other Australian dramas on 7Plus.

Vanessa Downing too! She was only 29 when the series began. I know Carol Willisee was much closer in age to what Pippa would have been though, so that was a last minute swap. If I recall correctly, Pippa and Ailsa were meant to be the same age.

I'd agree it was the Edward pairing that made her memorable. But she still had a good dynamic with the Nash family, especially Gypsy.

Travis just seemed like a rather forgettable character to me. If he hadn't have married Rebecca, I don't think he'd be that remembered at all. I feel like Joel was a more complex character, perhaps because of his job and his relationships with Tom and Gypsy. I think Gypsy is definitely the most popular member of the Nash family, but Joel will always be my favourite.