Jump to content

1988 Episode Discussion


Dan F

Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm a bit confused about who Stan is in regards to Colleen and Les. Did they change his name in later episodes or was Les a man she got with later? - I've never heard her talk about Stan before. :huh:

Posted

I think when they brought him back in 2000, they may have got the name of Colleen's ex confused with Celia's. Celia's fiance that was killed in was called Les and she talks about him a lot. The writers of the "Les" episodes in 2000 may have thought they remembered correctly, but were actually thinking about Celia's ex.

Didn't they make a similar mistake that year by saying Colleen's maiden name was O'Rourke? That was in fact Ailsa's real maiden name. Colleen's was Hickey. It was probably the same writer again thinking they remembered correctly, but not getting it quite right.

Posted

I think you're right, and IIRC at the same time Ailsa went back to her childhood home, her neighbour mentioned "Ailsa Hogan", which was Ailsa's name after she left prison.

Like in 2008, it was nice that they were intertwining the history of the show in with the present, it's just a shame that they occasionally made a few errors.

Posted

Yeah I thought that was a bit odd too. A decent week but a bit below that of recent standards IMO.

I agree that Narelle is a great character and wasn't it nice to see Colleen!!

Posted

You really can tell these are the early years sometimes, can't you? As much as I'm really enjoying them, some of the dialogue is incredibly clunky und unnatural, i.e. Barbara telling Donald that the thought of them falling in love again "revolts" her! Having said that, I really think they had a brilliant character in Donald. He has everyone's best interests at heart, and says what he thinks, but he just really gets on the wrong side of people. Having seen these early years, I can now understand why he was the way he was whe he returned to the show back in 2007 - it turns out that his behaviour which I considered out of character was actually very in-character. I'd really like to know why this unhealthy relationship has devloped between Alan and Fisher. Obviously we've seen that they don't get on, but we've never actually been told why. It's funny looking back and seeing Alan and Bobby scheming against Fisher when it eventually turns out that they're both his children!

Another thing - does anyone else think it was mighty weird to see them using type-writers in episode 139? It's a very strange thought that back in 1988 the writers and storyliners must have had to use type-writers to produce storylines and scripts, that must have been a real pain!

I still feel as though Floss and Neville are bit-parts - I think the scene where Floss broke down to Neville about Pippa's predicament proved this.

Posted

  Edward Skylover said:
You really can tell these are the early years sometimes, can't you? As much as I'm really enjoying them, some of the dialogue is incredibly clunky und unnatural, i.e. Barbara telling Donald that the thought of them falling in love again "revolts" her!

Er, sorry, but I really fail to see anything clunky or unnatural about that at all. :huh:

Posted

  Edward Skylover said:
.......Barbara telling Donald that the thought of them falling in love again "revolts" her!......

That was a cruel and demeaning thing for her to say to her (ex) husband.

Posted

It certainly hit the spot, there's no doubt about it! :lol:

I remember watching an ep of Press Gang in the early 00s, and how new and shocking the newsroom getting a computer with a modem was. I was like :huh:

It made me feel old. :(:lol:

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.