Are the current producers ruining Home and Away?

[Luke39]

My point of view was that some of the audience may not know past characterisation. So that wouldn't effect their viewing experience. Whether or not there is character assassination going on. Does it really matter? Presently they have decided to introduce Olivia as a Teenager. So her entire characterization is different. Its okay to not like that. But it is what it is.

[Gerard]

11 hours ago, Edward Skylover said:

I think the best thing the show could do is bring back one of Pippa's foster children. It's the only thing which will give the show a long term direction. The whole point of the show was about fostering, the Fletcher family. They re-cast Pippa is 1990 because they knew how essential that family was to the show. What is the point of shoe-horning Alf and Leah into Summer Bay House? What's going to happen when all of Zac and Leah's teens leave? I don't want to see them fostering because it would seem contrived. 

The best thing would be to bring back one of Pippa's foster children and for them to start fostering. Sophie can't come back unfortauntely, I'd like Jack to come back with some foster kids in tow, unlikely maybe? But I think it'd be great and it'd be a contrast to having the 'matriarchal' figure at the centre of Summer Bay House. Don't know if the actor's still acting, I hope so, if not bring back Carly, she was also a great character. Even if these actors don't want to return, they've got a raft of former foster kids they could bring back to start the show on a new path.

I agree with all of this. When "Home and Away" began, it was all about a central foster family who moved to the fairly sleepy town of Summer Bay and explored both the family relationships within the foster family, and also the general resistance of the conservative locals to having an unconventional family unit containing mainly teens from former troubled backgrounds.

Everything was very character based, and while there was room for lots of action and humour, it was all about the characters, and friction between the generations. Even when the original foster children moved on, they were seemlessly replaced by a new generation of equally troubled teens. Everything felt natural and right. There was a fair share of over dramatic stories, as with any soap, but this was balanced out with humour and relationships.

I must admit to being quite disappointed when the fostering element all but disappeared, which started with the departure of Pippa, but eroded for a few years under the Nashes, before they more of less wiped the slate clean and went in a different direction with the Sutherlands, and the "Drop In Center" (I never totally bought into the "teens helping teens" thing). They could have gone down the path of re-casting Pippa, or perhaps persuaded Debra Lawrence to stay on for another 6 months or year, had a whirlwind marriage and then killed Pippa off, with the new husband maintaining the continuity - not sure how I would have felt had it played out that way). Or they could have possibly found a new set of foster parents to take over from Pippa, longer term, as they didn't want to uproot the children (or whatever credible plot they could come up with).

I don't blame the Sutherlands for the situation H&A is in today, but they did send the series off in other direction. Having said that, things did nearly come full circle years later when we had Sally take on the Pippa role, with Flynn. I think that set-up worked really well, and H&A seemed to be heading back on course. However by this stage, TPTB seemed to be upping the ante as far as the dramatic plots were concerned, with more crime and violence, and this must have worked ratings-wise, as we seem to have been stuck in that mode ever since. We had over the past years ever more gripping plots, like the Sarah Lewis siege, Sally being stabbed etc. But TPTB must have realised they were onto something as more and more crime took over, at the expense of character development, even sideling old favourites like Irene and Alf for younger better looking "hunks", who also appealed to the current audience.

Summer Bay was no longer a peaceful backwater, but felt more like some kind of gangster-ridden suburb of the city. Gone was the warmth and safely of family life, and in came the "eye for an eye" mentality, where revenge was the name of the game. Once people getting beaten up, maimed or killed became the norm, where do you go from here?

What do the current H&A audience tune in for, and would the audience soon get bored if they returned to family based character driven plots? How much crime-driven drama would be the right amount to keep most of the viewers satisfied - without going to one extreme or the other? The safest option if their main concern is viewing figures, is to stick with the current course they have been on for the past few years, even if it means alienating fans of the traditional series. Change is a risk, it might pay off, it might not.

[Skylover]

I don't want them to stay in this current direction.

My only hope is that one day Kate Ritchie decides to return full time because I think that's the only possibility of the show ever returning to its roots of sorts with the foster element. I don't think they'll ever bring back Jack/Carly etc full time. It's such a shame. Having said that, in a way I enjoy Alf/Leah etc in Summer Bay House, even if it doesn't quite make sense, but I do wonder what's going to happen when Oscar/Evelyn etc inevitably leave.

[Homeandawayfan.]

I personally hate the current direction. The show now is so unrecognisable to what it was 20 years ago. It has gone from a family drama to a crime/psychological thriller show. There is always someone being killed, maimed, or a drugs and guns war. Maybe it is me being old school but I grew up with the Shangel, Tug, Damo, Sophie Simpson days of the show, when it was watchable. Back then the crimes were usually petty such as Shane nicking some water bottles from Alf's store or the hilarious Jack, Sonia and Selina love triangle and him two timing her and getting a shiner. In 2016 a love triangle usually ends up with someone being killed. To the teens who like all the carnage and cruelty it is not broken, but to the old school viewers it is broken, shattered. Why is it still called "Home And Away"? It should be renamed "CSI Sydney" or "Underbelly Sydney". I occasionally dip in to an episode after Neighbours finishes but still no improvement, it did start to improve towards the end of last year but soon reverted back to default. Maybe I should cut my losses and switch off for good.

 

[dee123]

3 hours ago, Pierced Musie said:

I have said it quite a lot but I am saying it again. My main problem isn't with Olivia but with the way she was introduced. In my opinion you don't assassinate a past character who left years ago (James) just to make a connection between Irene & Olivia (the abuse). He wasn't a perfect character but he has now been painted as a cold & heartless person... he turned in to his Mother . All of this would have been good... if James had re-appeared. Which will probably never happen.

But the past doesn't matter of course. 

Nothing of importance happened before Brax arrived

[Luke39]

Nostalgia is all it is. That and Partial.possession. Ten years from now. If H and A still has the viewership.to Still be on the air lol. Ppl here might be going show needs to return to its roots like in 2016 haha. Change is the only constant. I think it has returned to its traditional roots in some way. The foster aspect has returned. Established Teen Group of Maddy, Evie, Matt, Oscar, Josh etc (Despite some changes ahem). I think some reminess for the old days. Well its never going to be like it was in the past. But personally I.think the show does a good job of producing.the show very current. The set designs feel like 2016. As opposed to Neighbours where it feels like I'm watching a show in the nineties. Imo I don't think it needs to.revert backwards. Show imo feels pretty good.

What was feasible then ain't now. Im figuring its the crime aspect ppl.feel.are destroying the show? But to be quite honest that has settled down. And always been an aspect to the show. I mean.when you've got a police station in town. You gotta expect that. But I just think since 2011. It was overkill. Shows like Breaking Bad are trendy. But issue was balance. Its not.as effective watching a small community have constant crime. At some point its like yeah saw that coming.

Like the Eye special ep. Ugh. Sorry overkill. Well done episode. But honestly is this Blue Heelers or Home and Away. Not sure. That's why CHarlotte was so good. And its no coincidence since her departure. Things have declined slightly. You had this woman terrorizing a small place. And bring danger to eveRyday ppl. With the right dose. Not Brax bringing all his past dealings with Pirravich into.the show. With Ed Sherran. Show felt like 2001. Recently show has gradually gotten better. But that crime aspect needs to really go.away.

[~Lynd~]

It's not about nostalgia though.Not entirely anyway.If I wanted crime and violence I'd watch Daredevil or Breaking Bad, both of which I love but we watch different things for different reasons.Should shows evolve?Yes but not to the extent where it makes no sense.The entire premise to the show is so different to how it was originally that they might as well scrap HAA and rename the show.

I still enjoy the show enough to continue watching but it's not the HAA I grew up with and the relevance of those issues still continue today.The success of shows like 800 words and House Husbands shows us that not everything has to be so dark.

[Pierced Musie]

7 hours ago, Edward Skylover said:

I don't want them to stay in this current direction.

My only hope is that one day Kate Ritchie decides to return full time because I think that's the only possibility of the show ever returning to its roots of sorts with the foster element. I don't think they'll ever bring back Jack/Carly etc full time. It's such a shame. Having said that, in a way I enjoy Alf/Leah etc in Summer Bay House, even if it doesn't quite make sense, but I do wonder what's going to happen when Oscar/Evelyn etc inevitably leave.

 

I have always wondered if they regret making Christopher (Pippa's son) gay. He would have been the perfect character to take over the foster element from Sally because a recast would not have been out of place, plus there would have been no real reason to age him up. This could have all happened in 2009 instead of Charlie & Joey (who I was a fan of!), which became an excuse of why not to have a gay/lesbian character on H&A.

Weird how Gay!Chris was in 2003 and accepted as a great coming out tale (although the original idea of Seb coming out would have been epic!) yet in 2016 H&A is perhaps one of the only soaps to not embrace a gay/lesbian character.

 

[Luke39]

They have a potential lbgt couple with Skye and Olivia. Or is that just me haha. 

[Skylover]

Can you not foster in Australia if you're gay? If you can, there's no reason for Chris not to return as a foster parent.