Why do the producers ignore Shandi Palmer?

[Red Ranger 1]

4 hours ago, adam436 said:

It would be the chemistry between the actors - if they cast the right actor and he/she has the right chemistry with their onscreen family member, it would make a difference. For example, look at the relationship between Irene and Chris Harrington. The real life relationship between Lynne and Johnny obviously made a difference there, but it shows how the right actor can work and he was much more than just another lodger coming through her revolving door. 

On the other hand, you could cast a "bad boy" character called Paul Roberts who does nothing other than romance Mackenzie or Rose and barely share any scenes with Irene. 

Exactly. This is why I'm saying it's not a magic fix. Saying "Bring in Shandi Palmer" (not even the actress apparently, just any character who just happens to be called Shandi Palmer and is related to John), as if that's automatically going to change things seems rather short-sighted. You can bring in an entirely new character and they can build a good relationship with one of the mainstay characters who they're not a blood relative of. (Which, in case people have forgotten, is what Home and Away's supposed to be about!) Or you could bring in a character who's a blood relative of one of the mainstays and have them not bring anything that the characters already there aren't already providing.

 

4 hours ago, Skylover said:

Actually, in soaps it's far more unrealistic for a long lost relative to disappear.

That's practically insane troll logic. Are you saying that what happens in a soap is more realistic than what happens in real life? Anyway, I think any soap could provide examples of relatives (long lost or otherwise) who just disappear once their storyline's done or the actor decides to leave.

4 hours ago, Skylover said:

Home and Away has had its day. Whether Neighbours is a success on Amazon or not, Home and Away is way more crap than Neighbours and has been for years. I'd rather they were both flourishing, but it is what it is. 

Matter of opinion. Both of them probably aren't as good as they used to be, but then what is?

[Homeandawayfan.]

I do not watch the current H&A anymore. Like Emmerdale has done, H&A is another soap that has changed the most over the years.

[Skylover]

18 hours ago, Red Ranger 1 said:

You can bring in an entirely new character and they can build a good relationship with one of the mainstay characters who they're not a blood relative of. (Which, in case people have forgotten, is what Home and Away's supposed to be about!)

Except H&A hasn't been like that for years. All the older characters just interact with each other, and the only time they speak to the younger characters is to serve them coffee. So it's not an argument that stacks up.

[Red Ranger 1]

5 hours ago, Skylover said:

Except H&A hasn't been like that for years. All the older characters just interact with each other, and the only time they speak to the younger characters is to serve them coffee. So it's not an argument that stacks up.

That doesn't mean that it couldn't be like that, or that it should fall back on bringing in old characters recast to make them relevant. And it's only since the second half of last year that Irene hasn't had younger characters living with her and plenty of screen time with them at home.

[Skylover]

7 hours ago, Red Ranger 1 said:

That doesn't mean that it couldn't be like that, or that it should fall back on bringing in old characters recast to make them relevant. And it's only since the second half of last year that Irene hasn't had younger characters living with her and plenty of screen time with them at home.

It can be a mix, which is what I'm advocating for. I'm not saying the cast should be made up of Shandi, Martha, Damian, Nathan, their kids, Duncan etc. But there should be a mix. If I was the producer, I'd certainly be looking to bring back Shandi, Martha jr and one of Irene's grandchildren, but I think that would suffice. There should still always be a mix of unrelated characters as well, but I don't agree with the militant stance against using characters' families, which feels nonsensical.

[joany208121]

On 18/01/2023 at 11:21, Red Ranger 1 said:

Exactly. This is why I'm saying it's not a magic fix. Saying "Bring in Shandi Palmer" (not even the actress apparently, just any character who just happens to be called Shandi Palmer and is related to John), as if that's automatically going to change things seems rather short-sighted. You can bring in an entirely new character and they can build a good relationship with one of the mainstay characters who they're not a blood relative of. (Which, in case people have forgotten, is what Home and Away's supposed to be about!) Or you could bring in a character who's a blood relative of one of the mainstays and have them not bring anything that the characters already there aren't already providing.

 

 

I think it’s very hard to build those close non-related relationships (Irene and Chris or Max and Colleen) when they we no longer have everyday soap scenes, instead we are constantly in high drama. Having related characters makes it easier to see why they care for each other, and the lengths that family will go to for each other. The most recent family relationship that has boomed in years has been Roo and Martha - look at the moral dilemma of the kidney story. 
 

I think close knit relationships are hard to find nowadays because we have so many waif characters. Of the 22 current characters, they have 18 different surnames. 

[Red Ranger 1]

8 hours ago, joany208121 said:

Of the 22 current characters, they have 18 different surnames. 

Like I say, that's just Home and Away. Of the original 18 characters, you had 14 different surnames. If you go by the characters on the opening credits post-pilot, that was 12 characters with 10 different surnames, and not a single blood relation among them (...or at least not as far as we knew at the time). You had two married couples, and in the expanded cast you had a father and daughter (who are on the show now!) and a pair of siblings (whether or not they count as "hot" is, I guess, down to personal taste...).

[Skylover]

4 hours ago, Red Ranger 1 said:

Like I say, that's just Home and Away.

Home and Away actually never was about people having different surnames. The original show was actually about a foster family, and the wider community around that foster family. So the current set up is pretty much as far away from the original concept as you can get. It's too late in the day to go back to the fostering concept now though, so they may as well put the anchors of the show to good use and have some unconnected characters as there always has been.

[adam436]

I honestly can't see any "domestic" soap opera surviving these days. In the age of streaming, it needs to be high drama to keep people coming back.

Introducing Shandi Palmer is not going to fix the John problem, as she will probably spend all her time trying to decide between Cash and Remi and not actually share many scenes with him. Even if they did cast someone who has perfect onscreen chemistry with Shane Withington, the producers would be too short-sighted to build on that and create a "double act" (for lack of a better term). The same goes for Irene's grandchildren - you could cast Mark or Paul Roberts, but aside from using that link to introduce the character, they would just be another "bad boy" who will hop on the romantic merry-go-round after a week or two and barely interact with Irene. 

Having said that, Theo has given Leah a new lease of life to an extent, but I guess he is a little younger than what Shandi Palmer or Irene's grandchildren would be, so he still needs a mother figure. The same goes for Ryder with Alf and Roo, but likewise, he was a teenager when he first arrived and the show still had a teenage group, albeit much smaller, back in 2017. 

[Skylover]

I think the proof is in the pudding with Theo and Ryder. They've worked much more successfully than most of the other characters of the last 10 years, and in the same vein, so have the Astonis and Morgans, because they were bigger family units. The sibling duos don't work at all.

Even if Shandi or Irene's grandchild were involved in the latest love triangle, I still think I'd be more invested in them than the current characters.