alexx Posted September 16, 2011 Report Posted September 16, 2011 Yes as I was watching the frog storyline I was thinking... I'm actually more entertained watching this than I am Hammer and his gang in 2011!
beau_t Posted September 16, 2011 Report Posted September 16, 2011 Yes as I was watching the frog storyline I was thinking... I'm actually more entertained watching this than I am Hammer and his gang in 2011! I have barely even been watching the 2011 episodes these past few weeks. I dipped in to see Gypsy's return, that's about it. "Hammer and his gang". Hmmm. I don't know who that is but those 4 words tell me everything I need to know about the current show to know I'm better off sticking to the Early Years episodes for now. The funny thing is, during every single episode of the Early Years, they show a promo for the next 2011 episode. And it almost always features the river boys. Ironically what they are doing is showing me a contrast and saying "Yep, this is still going on in the current show, stick to the early years."
GameTime Posted September 16, 2011 Report Posted September 16, 2011 I haven't watched a new episode for over a month, in fact probably almost 2 months. It's just no good.
Red Ranger 1 Posted September 16, 2011 Report Posted September 16, 2011 Having seen Ben's first few episodes, I haven't seen much wrong with him so far.He's perhaps a bit easily led by Dave(who seems to be a bit of a loser frankly, kind of like Martin turned up a notch or two), but he seems to be getting over that.Can't comment on his proposal, although it just sounds like typical soap fare, guess we'll see when we get there. Agree about the current show.One advantage of the three episode rule is this week in the UK we had two episodes with no criminal gangs, no corrupt and/or incompetent police officers, no characters who should be the bad guys being written as protagonists.Just a bunch of ordinary small town folk in mature, adult relationships, the sort of thing the show should be promoting and doing all the time.Unfortunately we also had three episodes of utter dross.If it wasn't for those episodes with no Charlie/Brax/River Boys nonsense, with characters and storylines I actually like and care about, I'd give up on it.
Ryan Posted September 17, 2011 Report Posted September 17, 2011 I'm in agreement, outwith the River Boys story, the cast is very strong and there's interesting places I think they can take the Braxtons if they can come to some sort of conclusion to the gang storylines, but at the moment, like the boat scene in Prisoner, it's endless. I often think men with long hair look stupid, but perhaps it's because I've seen John Adam with long first, I might make an exception. Once the Simpson storyline has got going, I've enjoyed it and Sophie is welcome addition to the cast, though I do feel my knowledge of what comes next might hamper me as such with the new arrivals.
alexx Posted September 17, 2011 Report Posted September 17, 2011 Having seen Ben's first few episodes, I haven't seen much wrong with him so far.He's perhaps a bit easily led by Dave(who seems to be a bit of a loser frankly, kind of like Martin turned up a notch or two), but he seems to be getting over that.Can't comment on his proposal, although it just sounds like typical soap fare, guess we'll see when we get there. Agree about the current show.One advantage of the three episode rule is this week in the UK we had two episodes with no criminal gangs, no corrupt and/or incompetent police officers, no characters who should be the bad guys being written as protagonists.Just a bunch of ordinary small town folk in mature, adult relationships, the sort of thing the show should be promoting and doing all the time.Unfortunately we also had three episodes of utter dross.If it wasn't for those episodes with no Charlie/Brax/River Boys nonsense, with characters and storylines I actually like and care about, I'd give up on it. Yes, this is exactly how I feel about the current show. The week just gone in Australia was the same, the first 3 episodes were all River Boys, gangs, 'bad boys' and criminal warfare. The last two episodes were both about community spirit, people giving each other a fair go, family drama, some lighthearted interactions and heartwarming scenes. Such a contrast, I feel like I'm watching H&A two times per week and Underbelly the rest of the time. The annoying thing is the show has found a new audience who want to see the River Boys and gangs, its the only reason they are tuning in and the producers seem to have cottoned on to this and are milking it for all its worth.
Old H&A Fan Posted September 17, 2011 Report Posted September 17, 2011 I don't get what your problem with Ben is at all. You sound like a possessive lover of Carly.Me? Have the hots for Carly?? Yeech!! Carly is a snob! Not my type!! Ben suffers from the Mr Smooth Nice Guy problem, is portrayed on-screen as smelling like roses while in contrast his best mate "Dave" (Luke) smells like ****.
Natasha Posted September 17, 2011 Report Posted September 17, 2011 The annoying thing is the show has found a new audience who want to see the River Boys and gangs, its the only reason they are tuning in and the producers seem to gave cottoned on to this and are milking it for all its worth And has basically forgotten about us long-time fans. Its all about the new fans and the River Boys.
ebrett84 Posted September 17, 2011 Report Posted September 17, 2011 Having seen Ben's first few episodes, I haven't seen much wrong with him so far.He's perhaps a bit easily led by Dave(who seems to be a bit of a loser frankly, kind of like Martin turned up a notch or two), but he seems to be getting over that.Can't comment on his proposal, although it just sounds like typical soap fare, guess we'll see when we get there. Agree about the current show.One advantage of the three episode rule is this week in the UK we had two episodes with no criminal gangs, no corrupt and/or incompetent police officers, no characters who should be the bad guys being written as protagonists.Just a bunch of ordinary small town folk in mature, adult relationships, the sort of thing the show should be promoting and doing all the time.Unfortunately we also had three episodes of utter dross.If it wasn't for those episodes with no Charlie/Brax/River Boys nonsense, with characters and storylines I actually like and care about, I'd give up on it. I dunno, I don't really feel the need for Home and Away to be "promoting" anything except good story lines and I don't suggest taking morality lessons from a soap opera. I don't mind shows where the protagonist(s) is a total jerk. Two of my favourite shows are the Sopranos and Breaking Bad and they barely have a single likeable and decent person between both sets of characters. My favourite show ever is the Wire and while the people in that universe aren't quite as despicable, they're generally not very good people either. So why do I watch them? Because even if they're not good people at least they're interesting and compelling to watch. The trouble with Charlie and the River Boys is that they fail at that, not that they're bad people and that having them as main characters is sending a bad message.
Lulu1978 Posted September 17, 2011 Report Posted September 17, 2011 I gave up on H&A about 10 years ago.I will always love the 80's/90's H&A though.I tried watching the show again late last year but gave up after seeing how awful the show is now.I am sick of the current episodes being promoted during the early years episodes.It does not make me want to tune into what's happening in 2011 H&A.I grew up watching H&A when it was a great show.1990 may not have been H&A's greatest year either,but it was definitely alot better than current H&A.The current episodes are a waste of time watching.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.