Are the current producers ruining Home and Away?

[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.

[JimRRR]

The show has its highs and lows.....Some days its quite good. Then, there are episodes when you say, "My God, what were they thinking?"

My criticism: John and Marilyn....don't get it....Both actors are awesome and they play their parts beautifully, but much of their relationship is played for comic purposes. I'd rather see Marilyn with a much younger bloke. Also, there is no sexual chemistry between this couple

Then, there's Irene....Give her a storyline...please.

[CaptainHulk]

Maz and Younger Blokes have never really worked out... Lance and Adam being prime examples, the latter moreso.

[adam436]

The show has its highs and lows.....Some days its quite good. Then, there are episodes when you say, "My God, what were they thinking?"

My criticism: John and Marilyn....don't get it....Both actors are awesome and they play their parts beautifully, but much of their relationship is played for comic purposes. I'd rather see Marilyn with a much younger bloke. Also, there is no sexual chemistry between this couple

I am a casual viewer these days (regular viewer from 1996-early 2006 and the early years up to the Pippa switch) meaning I will just leave it on in the background after Neighbours if I am doing something else. The episodes which don't feature Kyle, Phoebe, Brax, Ash(?), Andy and Hannah are the best ones. When these characters are on, I just tend to zone out. Full episodes without these characters, I sometimes wonder why I don't tune in full-time again.

John and Marilyn's relationship is often played for comedy storylines, but so was her marriage to Donald Fisher. The stories involving Byron and Marilyn's post-natal depression were serious, but that was more an exit storyline for her than anything else. They should try to find a balance for John and Marilyn - for anyone watching Neighbours, Karl and Susan and Toadie and Sonya are a good models to follow. They can do serious storylines, but they are also brilliant at comedy storylines too.

[CaptainHulk]

^And let's not forget Don and Maz's battle to have a kid in the first place was pretty dramatic too, with the miscarriage of the first child (whom they would have called Oscar)