Are the current producers ruining Home and Away?

[cadyctslover]

17 hours ago, Matt said:

Considering there is no knowledge of what she actually does, I think it's a little bit ignorant to be having an opinion - and I'll be blunt, from what I've read, none of you actually know what her job entails.

What a ridiculous thing to say! Most people have an opinion on Politics, but by your logic they shouldn't unless they know how to govern a country.

Put simply, as Series Producer of the show Lucy has an active role in producing must-see, enjoyable drama. Plainly they are missing the mark for several viewers, no matter how much a minority want to downplay that fact.

[Homeandawayfan.]

H&A has to show drama and intrigue to survive but they have really gone too far in the past few years. In 1988 the show had plenty of scandal and mayhem but there was a balance. Today there is 3 times as much. It makes the mayhem in Hollyoaks look timid. I doubt Lucy has been told to turn it into a crime show as the show was rating well before that so why the sudden change in direction? Most of the content of the show is down to one person, the producer. No coincidence that when a new producer comes into a soap it feels different. EastEnders went from sensational to realistic again since a new producer came in.

[John]

This discussion is becoming unnecessarily personal.  This must cease. The title of this topic is "Are the Current Producers Ruining Home and Away".  There is obviously a divergence of views about this. Members need to put their views without personal references particularly "put downs" or claims of superior understanding or knowledge which belittle others.

[Matt]

6 hours ago, cadyctslover said:

What a ridiculous thing to say! Most people have an opinion on Politics, but by your logic they shouldn't unless they know how to govern a country.

Most people do have an opinion on politics, but I hold the same belief - don't have an opinion, if you don't know all the facts. I find it incredibly annoying.

[dee123]

On 19/12/2016 at 3:00 PM, Matt said:

I think it's very easy for people to sit back and put the boot into Lucy

It's fun too

She's had her moment in the sun, it's time to give someone else a chance.

[Luke39]

Well none of us know how Lucy a tv producer runs a tv show. A successful one I mind you. So it's pretty easy to blame her for everything. But for all we know ppl around her think she's doing a great job. I mean are any of us working for 7. Or any major by networks? I know I'm not Haha. I'm just saying. I think theirs a fine balance between connecting to the past. But also being current. I think the fostering aspect should become more apparent next year. But I like where the show is at right now.

[dee123]

1 hour ago, Luke39 said:

Well none of us know how Lucy a tv producer runs a tv show. A successful one I mind you. So it's pretty easy to blame her for everything. But for all we know ppl around her think she's doing a great job. I mean are any of us working for 7. Or any major by networks? I know I'm not Haha. I'm just saying. I think theirs a fine balance between connecting to the past. But also being current. I think the fostering aspect should become more apparent next year. But I like where the show is at right now.

Like it or not she's the public face for the people who work behind the camera. Is it fair she cops all the criticism? No but that's just the way it is.

[Gerard]

Unless we know what discussions have gone on behind the scenes on H&A over the past few years, any theories of why the series is in the state it's in is largely speculation, particularly those that single out a particular person. I would speculate myself that it takes more than one person to get H&A into the situation it has been in over the past while. What we can criticize, as viewers, is the quailtiy of the finished product, what we see on screen, regardless of how it got there.

Then again, some people here think the series has never been better and has moved with the times, while others think it has never been worse and has moved too far away from what it should be, Can both sides be wrong? It's easy to say "if you don't like it then don't watch", but this is show that some of us have watched for most of our lives and grown up with. In a business, it costs significantly more to gain a new customer than keep an existing one. I'm not sure if it applies in the same way to TV viewers, but I think that's been forgotten somewhere along the way.

It's like the "new Coke" debacle back in the 80's (which I'm sure most will not remember - showing my age here). In short, they tampered with a much loved recipe and there was a huge backlash, so they changed it back. The difference with H&A's change in formula is that it's neither universally loved or hated, and even those of us who don't like it, will stick with it, for a while at least, in the hope it changes to something we do like. But this should not be an excuse for the series to output whatever it likes and assume the viewers will still watch.

[Bobby Forever Missed]

11 minutes ago, Gerard said:

 and even those of us who don't like it, will stick with it

Yeah......No

[John]

1 minute ago, Bobby Forever Missed said:

Yeah......No

You may never know what you're missing