Jump to content

Hollyoaks: Discussion Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

I can't take the woe-is-Anita stuff. It's not that I don't feel sorry for her because I do but the actress has a whiny voice and the facial expressions are also kind of melodramatic.

I thought Des was going to go at Ravi with a baseball bat or something -- the smoke bomb wasn't up to much. And doesn't Relish have a back entrance??

At least Zak did the right thing. It's sad seeing him, and Michaela, these days.

I don't feel sorry for Gaz, not really, although I think there's still some mileage left in the character and the actor is underrated. I guess it would be ironic if he left in the unintentional frameup over the gun (and seeing that gun end up with Gaz and the stuff with the police going to them because Zak thought Anita was being targeted was all very interesting, but did they say how the police or Zak knew where Anita was?). But I just :rolleyes: whenever Sasha, who endlessly worshiped the unhinged Warren, tries to talk about Gaz.

The scene with Steph telling Tom about her cancer was good, and so was Jack's reaction, and Jack trying to get Steph to know what to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Okay it looks like i'll be returning to Hollyoaks since the new showrunner is about to arrive. I'm starting with the week of June 7th only because I didn't wanna go too far back, but wanted to see where things were before he arrives. I'm looking at the arrival of the Sharpe family as his true start since we know that those are 100% characters he created. I think this could go either way so we'll see. I notice a lot of the actors he's casting are very pretty so I just hope they can act. I'm beginning to see it truly is going to be a very different show and I just hope it's a GOOD show.

Will keep you guys posted once I begin viewing episodes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Marquess' first episode was a huge snore. Nothing felt different and I've noticed not even any subtle changes. But I guess we'll have to wait another month or two for actual stories to kick in. But still, not even the tone of this episode seemed different from what we've usually gotten under Lucy Allan.

Cheryl's dancing. :rolleyes:

I don't find this racism story interesting at all.

When did Lee Hardman start getting listed as EP with Tony Wood and Carolyn Reynolds? :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I didn't see a big difference either, but this was the first time in years I've kind of liked Cheryl, so...that's something?

The racism stuff interests me when the McQueens are involved (although I'm not sure Jacqui would get all that upset on behalf of Ravi) but I'm not that involved when it's about the Roys. Ravi's acting, especially when he said he wanted to get his hands on Gaz, cracked me up. The scenes with Jacqui trying to keep things under control with her family do compel me though. The stuff about Gaz and the gun not so much although the woman who plays the detective is really good.

Four years in and the acting from Sasha is still shocking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Please stop with the Valentine girls and their "acting." Where is Leo anyway? Gemma Merna is the only one carrying these scenes. And Sasha is such a cold, judgmental person who rarely has time for anyone else's grief. Ugh.

Gilly and Steph don't have a lot of passionate chemistry (although they have never really had that with much of anyone), but I like them together, they seem sweet. I like how he guilted Rhys into helping Steph out. Rhys needs another storyline now that his family is almost gone.

At least Myra is finally being brought into Theresa's pregnancy plot. Give her something to do!

Around a year ago today:

http://www.digitalspy.com/soaps/s13/hollyoaks/scoop/a165536/gossip-from-the-hollyoaks-press-day-2009.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

She has her moments, but that's mostly when she is reacting to something, when they just show her face. The more dialogue she gets or the more the scene is about her, the worse she is. She's also very inconsistent.

Edited by CarlD2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I thought she was OK but again I thought they kind of went on too long and there was too much talking.

Hollyoaks is an odd show in that I think some of their actors would be much better suited to silent films, like Amy. She has an expressive face, but with the "I don't currrr..." you get distracted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • A kind angel has added both episodes to the vault (UK Diva TV broadcast version). 
    • Yes, I think that is the most likely situation.  TPTB were unhappy with the offer(s) they got from the tourism board in Finland, and decided the trip was going to be too expensive for P&G/NBC to finance alone.   I would also speculate a similar situation likely occurred a few years later with the planned location shoot in Egypt, which was also cancelled after the storyline had already started, and changed to Arizona.  
    • What else? #May4th

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • In my usual account on my most used video hosting site with the video title  DAYS 1-8-15 Will & Paul Sex This is an edit I began when I was first teaching myself to edit & at that time I couldn't make it do what I wanted it to do. I pulled it up & finished it this morning. 
    • Or Megan is shot as retaliation for Dave's unpaid gambling debts...while Julie confesses she's the biological mother of Special Guest Star Barry Bostwick's little boy.
    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy