Are the current producers ruining Home and Away?

[jodlebirger]

Hm... I think that H&A has been far worse from 2010 and onwards, when it comes to storytelling than in the year with Abalone and smuggling people times. I really didn't like the abalone fishing thing, and smuggling people storyline, but 2009 had a lot of great character development and storylines in between. For example there were a lot of Aden/Belle storylines which I thought were good, even if some could have been better and the same with Rachel & Tony. And the year long mystery had under storylines that were interesting for example Aden and Geoff working at the trawler, Irene and Lou's early days, and Martha's interest in Bambang. I also liked Martha in the aftermath of Jack's death she became a character on her own again. And the summer bay community feeling was good.

The show has still potential, but has become stiff and to controlled and that has destroyed the process of good storytelling. Early 2013 had some great scenes with Rosie and the rest of the teens. I think it was a shame that Rose wasn't promoted as a regular and moved in with Irene instead of giving her foster parents we never saw. And Ginas death was handled pretty well, even if I thought her funeral was sandwiched between Braxton drama and it was difficult to feel moved.

But then the rest of the year was quite rubbish.

I think that 2014 has been quite rubbish, maybe the most rubbish year so far for me. It is not so insulting as some storylines in 2010 was, but they are more uninteresting dull uninteresting stuff and repeating storylines that we have seen 10000 times before from 2011 and onwards.

It is a shame though, because there is still a lot of potential. But the characters have to get more realistic and consistent personalities and their storylines and personalities have to change more naturally over time. And I also think that the characters need to be written as characters in the age group they are meant to be and also look like. Don't treat every character under 40 as teenagers, and the rest as clowns.

[LondonF4]

In all fairness Neighbours in that period DID have "Who Pushed Paul?".

H&A at that point had crap about Abalone/People Smuggling and Dead men who weren't really dead....

Maybe some people enjoyed Who Pushed Paul - all I remember is the dreadful Declan recast. Anywho, 09-12 was a legendary awful era for Neighbours and it has since recovered nicely. H&A isn't quite so dire in my eyes, its main problem is the crime emphasis and recycling of stories. So I think it can recover with less effort however there doesn't seem to be the desire for change by TPTB.

[Jezz]

In all fairness Neighbours in that period DID have "Who Pushed Paul?".

H&A at that point had crap about Abalone/People Smuggling and Dead men who weren't really dead....

Maybe some people enjoyed Who Pushed Paul - all I remember is the dreadful Declan recast. Anywho, 09-12 was a legendary awful era for Neighbours and it has since recovered nicely. H&A isn't quite so dire in my eyes, its main problem is the crime emphasis and recycling of stories. So I think it can recover with less effort however there doesn't seem to be the desire for change by TPTB.

I totally agree that the decision to recast Declan was a bad one even though James Sorenson had decided to quit the show rather than being axed by TPTB.

I actually enjoyed the who pushed Paul storyline and at least the episode 6000 milestone in 2010 featured iconic characters like Paul, Karl and Toadie in the episode. Overall, the SuBo era was terrible with too much emphasis on the teens and ruining characters like Steph and Libby but there were some positives amongst it but these were few and far between.

I noticed an improvement in the second half of 2012 to be honest and since then the show has improved even though I thought June 2013 to April 2014 (Kate's death) was a little dull for my liking. I feel like the show has improved considerably since Kate's death with good additions to the cast like Naomi, Daniel and Paige.

Home and Away isn't in a good state at the moment but I still find it to be a better show than Neighbours was in 2009 for example.

[CaptainHulk]

Oh god, the Sucky Declan recast. The character result was like someone grabbed Jack Scully and Taj Coppin, sewed them together and took out what little charisma there was from either!

I'm just glad Declan finished High School before the part was recast, Erin Mullaly would just look... "not right" in a school uniform.

And even 2009-12 Neighbours was nowhere as bad as 1995-early '96 Neighbours.

[Gerard]

I agree that H&A is not all bad, whereas Neighbours really did hit the skids from 09-12. The difference today is that H&A is still pulling decent numbers and is being artificially propped up by the shows around it. During the dark Subo era, Neighbours didn't have the luxury of being on a #1 network with strong shows on either side. It's easy for the audience to keep watching H&A regardless of the dip in content - they just hang around for MKR or XFactor or the show that comes after. But the minute Neighbours went bad, there wasn't enough happening on the network so viewers abandoned it.

I guess it will be interesting to see what 2015 brings for H&A - my prediction is more of the same. Having a "debate" about Neighbours vs H&A popularity in another forum, and that brought me back to this discussion. H&A clearly is still pulling in the viewers, while Neighbours struggles due (at least in part) to being on a minor channel. While H&A is a lot more popular in Australia, the opposite is true in the UK. Where the shows are on back-to-back at tea-time, people are obviously switching away before H&A comes on.

A lot of us seem to agree that H&A isn't that great at the moment, so why is it that it still draws big audience figures in Australia? Is it down, as you say LondonF4, to it being surrounded in the schedule by popular shows? Has the audience changed from one which enjoyed the traditional values of the series to an audience eager for crime and high drama which dominates the show these days? Obviously it would be risky if the producers altered the current format while it continues to be successful, but surely somewhere along the line people are bound to grow tired of the same thing, and it will have to change.

[cadyctslover]

While H&A is a lot more popular in Australia, the opposite is true in the UK. Where the shows are on back-to-back at tea-time, people are obviously switching away before H&A comes on.

Yes exactly, back to back on the same channel, and literally 1/3-1/2 the viewers can find something better to do.

[adam436]

I honestly think it is about time Home and Away had a revamp and returned to its roots. They have tried this a few times (in 2004/2005 with Sally and Flynn and 2012/13 with Roo and Harvey), but it never seemed to stick.

To do this, the producers need to get a married couple back into Summer Bay House and have them slowly start to build up foster children. Zac and Leah would be an ideal couple for fostering as she can't have anymore children and both love to support young adults. If they wrote out Hannah, then that would give them a head start with two new teenagers with Oscar and Evie. John and Marilyn could become a supporting couple who take in few waifs and strays too, much like Alf and Ailsa were supporting characters to Pippa and Tom/Michael.

I also think the gang/violence/"Braxton" element of the show needs to be removed, which would mean losing Brax, Andy, Kyle and Ash. Violence and drug storylines are fine in small doses, but they've been never-ending since the Braxtons arrived.I think Josh would be redeemable, but I think Phoebe would probably need to go too, as she doesn't have much to do with the rest of the characters. I can't see the current producers axing so many good-looking actors in one hit though

If they did this, I would actually consider Home and Away on a full-time basis again. I don't think Home and Away would become boring if they did. Revamps can work without becoming "boring". Neigbours returned to it family roots in 2013 by introducing two nuclear families, removing most of the waifs and strays and bringing back a host of former characters in guest stints. In my opinion, Neighbours is the most exciting it has been since 2004.

[LondonF4]

I agree that H&A is not all bad, whereas Neighbours really did hit the skids from 09-12. The difference today is that H&A is still pulling decent numbers and is being artificially propped up by the shows around it. During the dark Subo era, Neighbours didn't have the luxury of being on a #1 network with strong shows on either side. It's easy for the audience to keep watching H&A regardless of the dip in content - they just hang around for MKR or XFactor or the show that comes after. But the minute Neighbours went bad, there wasn't enough happening on the network so viewers abandoned it.

I guess it will be interesting to see what 2015 brings for H&A - my prediction is more of the same. Having a "debate" about Neighbours vs H&A popularity in another forum, and that brought me back to this discussion. H&A clearly is still pulling in the viewers, while Neighbours struggles due (at least in part) to being on a minor channel. While H&A is a lot more popular in Australia, the opposite is true in the UK. Where the shows are on back-to-back at tea-time, people are obviously switching away before H&A comes on.

A lot of us seem to agree that H&A isn't that great at the moment, so why is it that it still draws big audience figures in Australia? Is it down, as you say LondonF4, to it being surrounded in the schedule by popular shows? Has the audience changed from one which enjoyed the traditional values of the series to an audience eager for crime and high drama which dominates the show these days? Obviously it would be risky if the producers altered the current format while it continues to be successful, but surely somewhere along the line people are bound to grow tired of the same thing, and it will have to change.

Good point about H&A losing viewers from Neighbours, it really does seem to be quite a few hundred thousand viewers behind when you count up all the repeats. Digital Spy reports figures for 2 Neighbours screenings per day and 3 H&A ones on their website. I might be wrong but it seems like the gap between the two soaps is widening.

I would also say H&A's continued success down under is partly due to the massive promotion it gets. If you look at the Facebook page for TV Week it is on the cover every second week whereas Neighbours is never to be seen. It's pretty equal in the UK with both soaps getting the same small amount of covering in the listing guides which I wish should change. I was surprised Casey's death did not get more attention.

[Homeandawayfan.]

It is hard to predict what the show will be like in a few years time but I wont be surprised if the crime stories continue. Does the problem lie with the Braxton's? What would happen if Brax and Kyle cleared off this year? Would the crime stories drop? Hard to say but I hope so. I do appreciate a good crime story but in moderation. Even though Casey and Heath are gone, we still have Barrett and Martin Ashford. I watch H&A intermittently and Neighbours full time, 20 years ago I was glued to H&A and found Neighbours dull as dishwater.

[John]

I think Home and Away follows the current trends in Australian TV. We went through the Underbelly phase and Home and Away followed that trend. Australian TV has moved away from that now. It will be interesting to see where we head to from here. A lot of the promo material for Australian made drama this year seems to be based on historical Australian events and the 100th anniversary of the Gallipoli landings.