adam436

I think Justine Clarke and Mouche Phillips shared a flat. I vaguely recall reading an article about how Mouche was joining as Justine was leaving.

Do you mean the characters having a laugh or the audience laughing at the characters? Alf, Irene and Marilyn certainly had their share of lighter moments in the nineties so we know the actors are more than capable of the comedy stuff can do it. And Shane Withington can do comedy too. I can't comment on any of the younger cast since they've never really been given the opportunity. It feels like those characters haven't laughed in so long and with all the heightened drama, a comedy B plot would feel out of place right now. The closest story we have had it recent times would be Marilyn thinking John and Irene are an item, John's misusing his free coffee card and John and Alf's banter. I actually think getting John and Marilyn back together would relieve some of that - they can both be such fun characters and bounce well of each other with the right material, whilst still working well on the dramatic stories. John and Marilyn would give us a "fun couple", leaving Justin and Leah and all the younger pairings to carry all the dramatic relationship dramas. It's actually baffling they even separated in the first place really, since neither character has really grown or been taken in a new direction as a result of the separation. And with John and Marilyn sticking around long-term, they would have rivalled Alf and Ailsa for H&A's longest-running onscreen marriage. It's not easy finding that balance between comedy and heightened drama that H&A needs to maintain to survive. It's been done in the past in the 80s and 90s, but the show and television viewing habits have changed so much that that balance and formula wouldn't work today. That's why the examples I mentioned are probably the most we will get - they are lighter moments to break up the drama without going into veering into full-on sitcom territory like we did with many 80s characters.

It's a soap though - storylines can't move on if one event prevented two characters from being friends or interacting with each other. Hollyoaks does this frequently - the current Ste and Warren story is an example. I guess in a larger cast it is easier for characters to avoid each other (such as Sienna with Darren and Nancy), but it would become quite difficult in a small cast. I think one of my problems with the current show is that none of the couples are stable or feel like end-game: I'm talking Remi/Bree, Kirby/Theo, Rose/Mali, Xander/Dana and Cash/Eden. I understand characters and couples can't live drama-free lives, but where are the great love stories like Shane and Angel, Vinnie and Leah, Will and Gypsy (pre their early 2010s return), Travis and Rebecca, Sally and Flynn, Noah and Hayley etc. The current producers have proved they can give us the big love stories - they did it with Brax and Ricky and Dean and Ziggy. Those couples had their issues and broke up, but ultimately I cared about them and I believed they were end-game. I am not invested in any of the current couples because either the chemistry isn't there or the writers don't really know what to do with them so they break up and get back together every few months. In the 90s or 2000s, couples like Cash and Eden or Remi and Bree would be married off by now and probably starting a family. The writers' decision not to do that probably reflects modern society with people waiting longer to get married and starting a family, but I feel it also reflects a lack of commitment from the writers to create stable couples.

She appeared on the show during his most recent appearance in 2002. She was a nurse at the hospital and they fell in love at left Summer Bay together. I can't remember if we've had any updates on them since though.

It's actually getting ridiculous now - there are 5 pairs in the current cast, plus a vast number of past ones. I think the problem is that the Braxtons were so popular that the producers must think families of adult siblings is the answer - they tried to recreate the formula with the Morgans and the Paratas, but neither reached the same level of success, so now they've just seemed to stick of adult siblings now. They did try at least try something new with Lyrik, but that's just not working for me either. They wouldn't even need Tina or Matt - if Roo can be recast after Justine Clarke's iconic performance, then I'd say Finn and Damien would be fair game. I think it's more likely than luring either of them back to be honest. We've also got Irene's older son, Nathan and his wife Grace. Irene's grandsons via Finn would be the same age as many of the current cast, yet they'd prefer to have randoms like Xavier, Rose, Dana and Harper living with her. For Stewart family, we have Duncan and Ric. Duncan has a son who would now be early teens, and they could easily bring him back with a new wife and some step-kids. Ric was last seen in 2008, so he could also have children who are 14/15 at this stage (older with SORASing). Shandi Palmer or Leah's siblings Chris and Alex could also head up new families in Summer Bay. This is the reason I mentioned Heath Braxton and his kids - it would keep Lucy Addario and the Braxton fans happy, whilst still appeasing the fan base that want family units in the show again.

I certainly didn't hate them, but it's not my favourite era of the show either. I preferred them to Lyrik, especially around 2013/2014 once they'd settled in a bit. The only way it can get itself out of it is a complete overhaul. Any cast changes are likely to just replace one batch of cookie cutter twentysomethings with another, unless there is some sort of breakout character to come out of that. But even if there was, I imagine said character would get bogged down in relationship drama before too long. I imagine the introduction of Lyrik was meant to inject new life into the show, but it's been two years now so I think many of us are quite over it. Given how popular the Braxton family were, my suggestion would be to bring back Heath as a regular (since Steve Peacocke would unlikely return). It's probably a compromise that's going to suit anyone - it would appease Lucy Addario and the Braxton fanbase, whilst appeasing the fan base that want some teenagers back in the show. Darcy could slot into the twentysomething group and Harley would probably be 14-15 by now with inevitable SORASing.

And Irene. It was Irene's house he was staying at during his visit. Exactly! We've had worse rewrites of H&A history. Chris is more likely to head up a new family now rather than blend in with the younger cast, which means his coming out story is even more likely to be forgotten. If H&A ever do introduce an LGBT character, it would no doubt be someone in their early/mid twenties, rather than someone 35+

In the very unlikely event he did return, I'd imagine his 2003 guest stint would be forgotten completely.

Vika and Linda also featured in many Diner scenes too, and I'd consider them mainstream.

And Ken Smith with his kids too, but he was only around a year or so.

I think that comes down to the fact there was a mostly stable older cast in the early years: Alf, Ailsa, Pippa, Tom/Michael, Donald, Irene. Then we got Judith, Joel and Natalie in later years, who were introduced with their teenage children. The 2000s had more traditional families like the Sutherlands, Hunters, Holdens, Austins etc. as it somewhat drifted away from fostering.

Another good point - in 1988, all the regular teens lived with the Fletchers except Roo, though we did have a number of recurring and extended guest characters like Alison, Sandra, Alan, Matt etc. to flesh them out. Later teen gangs had less reliance on such recurring characters.

That's true - I guess the producers had no way of knowing that H&A or even Donald would have lasted so long, so it made sense to me for her to be a regular at that point. Maybe they thought one biological daughter for Fisher at a time was enough (again, the producers couldn't have known Bobby would stay so long!). Or maybe the producers wanted to increase the Summer Bay foster children? I think at this point, we were down to just Sally and Steven. Bobby and Carly were now adults (plus Bobby had a new family), an adult Frank and Lynn had left. Fisher fostered Viv and the Stewarts got Emma Jackson, but for some reason, the Fletchers didn't get a new permanent foster child until Sophie in 1990. Given they were the central family, I'm not sure what the reasoning was behind that - they got guest character Dodge, but no one full-time. It could have been that Roger and Vanessa both took extended breaks from the show, or maybe the producers wanted to give the other adult characters to develop more as foster parents.

I assumed it was Debra's maternity leave and them needing a "mum" at Summer Bay house - given she was the biological mother of two (of three?) of the foster children, it made sense logistically. Who else would there have been? Ailsa and Bobby had their own homes/families. On the subject of "testie guesties", do we think Jane Hall as Rebecca was another one? I only ask because just a few months later, Viv Newton was introduced: Viv moved into the Fisher household, was the same age, similar personality (studious, quiet) and also had a relationship with Steven. It's possible the original plan was for Rebecca to fill that gap, but for whatever reason, opted for a new character.

Justine, Tegan, Ken and possibly even Vinnie were another characters too. It's definitely the better way to go sometimes - it gives the producers a chance to test chemistry with other actors in the cast and depending on the gap between filming and transmission, gauge their popularity from the audience. Another one is possibly Teresa and Joe Lynch. They may have just been a plot device for Fisher's work life and the teen gang, but the fact they had them live with Irene and made an effort to develop Joe beyond two-dimensional bully suggests to be they were testing the waters there. Had Donna not been axed to make way for Marilyn, Gus Bishop may have made the list too: he would have been the latest wayward-teen-comes-good story arc and a love interest for Sally.

The weird thing is that his exit did feel somewhat planned. He'd quit his job at the school, moved out of Irene's place and his friendship with Donna had effectively ended. There was a conscious effort to physically isolate him from the rest of the town and very little reason for him to interact with the characters on a day to day basis. A temporary exit story or one he had to leave slightly early makes sense with how Rob's final weeks played out. Given Donna was leaving a few weeks later, it's possible they were meant to get their happy ending but Matthew had to leave early, so Travis stepped in for the Gus story and her exit.

I liked Kelly too, but I definitely would say I warmed to Donna more in the shorter time she was there. I've also seen Donna's episodes more recently and was probably a little young (I was 7/8 when Kelly was onscreen) to truly appreciate her as a character back then. As for bringing in Kelly after ditching Donna for budget reasons, I guess there may have been other factors. Maybe the producers wanted a doctor in the regular cast - given the ramped-up drama and stunts, it made sense - or maybe the producers didn't know what else they could do with Donna?

Me too! I've not seen them since then originally aired, other than the Nash house fire episode that was on 7Plus a few years ago. I was only 9 or 10 in the late 90s, so I'd like to rewatch that entire era with adult eyes -Joey's schizophrenia, the cult stuff, Justine's drug addiction, the Robert Perez stuff, Vinnie's testicular cancer, Marilyn and Donald's marriage, Justine on trial for the baby's murder etc.

I did not know this. Do you happen to know if it was the same situation for Rob Storey and Steven? It's a shame Donna was axed, because not long after Marilyn returned, Kelly Watson was introduced and pretty much slotted into that group where Donna probably would have been. Nothing against Kelly, but Donna was a far stronger character and more memorable character.

I guess for me, the difference between character and plot driven is how those characters develop as a result of the storyline. For example, everyone thinking Pippa was having an affair with Zac the Shark Hunter was very plot-driven for me. Once it was over, everyone just went back their lives the next day as if they hadn't accused their wife/friend of an affair. Alan and Donald's relationship was character driven for Fisher, because I feel that's when Fisher became more rounded and human, as opposed to the mean headteacher. If Alan had died and Fisher had just returned to his old self the following week (like how Alf discovered he had a long-lost daughter in Quinn, then forgetting about her for 20+ years), then it would be plot-driven. An example of a current plot-driven story is the recent Marilyn/Heather story. The story was heightened for dramatic affect and hasn't changed as a result. If the result was that we saw Marilyn have a relationship with her adult daughter or she decided to return to fostering etc. then it would be character driven. The same goes for John and Marilyn's split - the split didn't take either of them in new directions as characters and even the build up didn't make a great deal of sense. Apart from John's romance with Brydie Carter's character (which was plot driven, since she was murdered in a whodunnit), nothing has really changed for them as individual characters. In good writing, splitting up long-term couples should be a creative choice because it should allow the characters to go in new directions from which they may not have otherwise been able to.

The group that followed them were largely forgettable, but they didn't stay that long. I'm thinking the likes of Liam, Casey, Aaron, Stephanie and even Tom Nash to a lesser extent. Justine, Joey and Tegan are more fondly remembered, but they also stayed much longer. I'd say Will, Gypsy, Hayley, Nick, Jade and Kirsty were also quiet starters who went on to become iconic characters too.

That's a good point - Jack, Selina, Shannon and Curtis were all given time to settle in and build a fan base before they were thrown into the thick of storylines. I don't think it's a coincidence that they are probably considered the most iconic teenage gang the show has ever had. Many new characters aren't given that opportunity to settle into the show before they are thrown in the deep end, which sometimes affects how well they are received. It helped that Steven and Marilyn still knew quite a few characters from their time, which is not always the case. Also Marilyn was pretty much immediately moved into the Beach House and Steven had new interactions through his job as a teacher and with Travis (I think it was said that he, Travis and Donna were all in the same year at school together!) so that got him out beyond just interacting with the Ross family. The writers really put some thought into how they were going to work. ' May I ask who you were referring to with it isn't always the case? The only other regular returnees H&A has had have been Jesse McGregor, Kirsty Sutherland, Marilyn in 2010 and a recast Roo, plus Morag's semi-regular appearances in the mid-late 2000s. Jesse's eventually worked, but I felt like they had to pair him off with Leah pretty quickly for it to happen, and I wasn't really watching in the late 2000s, so I can't comment on Marilyn, Roo and Kirsty. Morag's semi-regular stint worked too because she's such a strong character and as a lawyer, was often in demand professionally.

1995 H&A just shows how a revamp can be done without a massive cast shake up. There was some natural turnover that is part and parcel of H&A, but for the most part, it was using the characters that were already established (the exception was probably Donna?). Bringing back Steven and Marilyn as full-time cast members was a shot in the arm too. That would have potentially renewed interest for lapsed or long-term viewers, whereas the cranked-up stories and focus on the newer younger cast (Curtis, Shannon, Selina, Jack) would have brought in some newer viewers too, including myself as a 7 year old at the time! Compare it to later revamps like 2000, where half the cast were written out to make way for newcomers like the Sutherlands, Noah etc who were instantly thrown into the thick of things. Axing characters seems to be Neighbours' and Hollyoaks' go-to when a revamp is required too (I can't comment on other soaps!), which we know have had mixed results.

I agree with that statement from H&A Early Years Insta page and I definitely prefer 1998-2000 over any other era of the show, but sadly character-driven drama is not considered engaging commercial television anymore. 1980s H&A would not survive at 7pm in 2024, even though it was filled with drama like Roo's pregnancy lie, Carly's rape, Alan and Donald's relationship and the Summer Bay Nutter. I can't speak for all soaps, but Neighbours and Hollyoaks have less emphasis on character and more on plot now. Hollyoaks has always has inter-family affairs, massive stunts, sinister villains and characters literally getting away with murder, and everyone has moved on the following week and it's often the repeat offenders repeating the same mistakes over and over, meaning very little character development. Neighbours is certainly better with character-driven stories, but it is still under pressure to opt for the plot-driven stuff, like Terese and Toadie's marriage being an obstacle to keep her and Paul apart, Karl becoming caricature so he can be used for all the comedy B plots and several regular characters being involved in covering up a "murder".

It seemed like a weird choice to bring back Pippa to oversee the teenagers at the Beach House, especially with the only two characters Pippa knew being absent at the time. They could have recast Irene's sister Wendy or even used Shelley Sutherland. Kirsty was around at the time, so Shelley could have popped back and stayed at Irene's with some flimsy throwaway line about the Caravan Park being full or something. From Debra's interview, it sounds like it was all very last-minute and disorganised, so they probably didn't have time to think logically about it.