Jump to content

Hollyoaks: Discussion Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

After all this (pointless, in my view) talk about the new credits, they arrive and the children on Digital Spy are not happy. Hilarious...

Anyway, I happened upon this old treasure from 2000.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQilATEA2iE&feature=related

My favourite version of the theme.

Edited by UK LAW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Who were those people at the end of the clip?

I like this one, although it makes me a bit dizzy.

I think they kept this up to 2005 didn't they? I remember some fans used to go on about how insane it was that Chloe stayed in the opening credits over a year after she'd left the show.

It's funny as I am not sure about a lot of the changes to the show but DS seems to like it but then I don't mind the opening and some at DS do.

What do you think of the show lately?

Edited by CarlD2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think the best way to answer the question is to compare it to going to a music festival and seeing a popular act on the main stage.

On occasion, one goes to the front and risks being battered in the mosh pit or being doused with stuff from the act on the stage.

I am the cautious so-and-so enjoying the act from a distance, close enough to see the act, facial expressions and all, but far enough to make a dash for it if it's not great or it starts raining.

In other words, I'm enjoying the show for what it is (and it's certainly not Pinter or Shakespeare) but the investment is not there. If it goes pear-shaped, it won't hurt me.

This is a show under Paul Marquess, the man who devised Footballers Wives, and turned The Bill from a police show to a show about models who happen to wear police uniforms.

This isn't a knock on Paul Marquess, who has his finger on some kind of pulse. And I'm not going to say I haven't enjoyed some of his work in the past but I haven't been expecting philosophical enlightenment or the answers to any of life's questions.

People have been somewhat spoiled by Bryan Kirkwood's stewardship of Hollyoaks, as his vision of the show was deeper and more complex than it was before or perhaps it ever will be again. If people expect that level of depth from the show under Paul Marquess then the disappointment will be palpable and possibly jading.

The majority of the praise for the show now comes from the 'Seth is fit' and 'Mitzeee is a hottie, check out that a***' brigade, so that is where we are.

Again, it's not a knock as it can be argued that the show has a 'typical' audience to service, and I can't speak for anyone else. In my view, the show is good to look at and it's colourful but I'm not going to just head first into a paddling pool. (At 6'1, that would be daft)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Thanks for your opinion! I think Kirkwood's time on the show was very uneven (2008 was just many missed opportunities and some questionable decisions, IMO), but I do see that he seemed to get the show more than a lot of producers. I agree with you that Marquess can't be held to the same standard.

I think my main annoyance is in the casting of certain roles and perhaps how panto some things seem. I haven't watched as much of the last few weeks though so I don't know how that's been.

So how do you feel about him re-doing the Diane Murray IVF story on Brookside?

Edited by CarlD2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Make no mistake, I am no Bryan Kirkwood fanboy, and I share some of your views on 2008 and no doubt some of the choices he will take on Eastenders. I just think he took a show that was rusting, restored it and painted it gold. (Lucy Allen then introduced what she thought was polish but turned out to be an erosive stripper).

As for the IVF story, I'm simply going to wait to see how it plays out. I could start caning it now and it could turn out to be the most though-provoking story this year. I could do the opposite and it could turn out to be absolute pony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think whether you agreed with all of Kirkwood's decisions or not, he kept a certain momentum on the show and brought a certain amount of credibility and positive press attention to the show that wasn't there before or after him. The ratings for the show for instance didn't start to free-fall until his work had really stopped airing (and a lot of his final work Lucy Allan had re-written).

I think Lucy Allan tried to build on the style that Kirkwood had created, but she just didn't know how to develop story or use characters to any of their potential. She had a bad tendency of having certain very poor characters hog up a lot of airtime, and 99% of her storylines were just boring as hell.

Using an EastEnders comparison, Lucy Allan was probably the Louise Berridge to Bryan Kirkwood's John Yorke.

Paul Marquess just seems to want to be rebuilding a show on a very unstable foundation. While the show needed a revamp after the horrendous Allan era, I don't know if he's going about it in the most sensible or organic way, which is probably true to his style of producing anyway. I don't even think the show is that much "fun" right now from what I've seen. It feels like it's just going through the motions. There hasn't been much of a transition period, Marquess just seems to have skipped most of that.

Edited by Y&RWorldTurner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Tuesday's episode:

Jesus Christ, Doug is the biggest prick I have ever seen. Just absolutely vile. When I have sympathy for some stupid pseudo alien, you know this character is a huge bust. FAIL, AGAIN! And Jamil, can anyone actually be that flaming retarded? These characters hurt my life.

Edited by Amello
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Doug needs more more than what he got, considering he hasn't learned not to be a huge prick. I want him dead or to disappear. I am perfectly okay with pretending he never existed. I'd watch Cheryl and Brendan 24/7 over this douchebag.

Jamil, on the other hand, is hot and cold. Mostly, I only really dislike him when he's with Doug and is written as a douchebag-mini. However, in his other scenes, like in the ones with India today, he was kind of likable. It is refreshing (pardon the pun) to see someone who is straight edge! Plus, his mysterious family drama has potential to be interesting.

Jem is a cow. Who made her queen of morality? Of course, making Leanne feel bad has the opposite affect for moi. Hate that cow as well.

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

    • I’ve been enjoying the pace the show has taken recently. Things don’t languish as long as they have and if they are drawing something out, like Gio’s adoption, it’s hasn’t been as excruciating. Also, my nosey nature would appreciate less interaction with posters I have on ignore so I don’t have to click on “options”.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Okay...I'm just going to call it. Ambyr Michelle is the breakout star of this show with the young set hands down! There is no character like Eva that pulls my heart strings, and she's playing it perfectly. If Eva and Leslie are on, it's a good episode! If written properly, Eva and Kat's rivalry is one that could go on for YEARS. Of course, it's fun to speculate about who is really whom, but I could see them developing as frenemies after some time. They really need a guy to tussle over to amp it up. Tomas is pretty, but the actor has got to loosen up some in his scenes, I think. He is improving though. It would be good to introduce a new young man in that story for a foursome.  Martin and Smitty finally feel like a real couple to me, too. Hopefully, they locked them into four year contracts.
    • I'll be that guy and say I don't think TMG is a fool. This is a popular contract role on a year-round soap opera for a woman of a certain age (to say nothing of a woman of color). If I'm her I pull a Kimberlin Brown and ride this til the wheels fall off.
    • Tbf it's not unusual for a family when they are dealing with some bad news that changes a life to use song to give out hope.Especially black families. I personally had to deal with that very thing this weekend. Partly off putting, but at the same time, I did get the point and it gave me a bit of hope in the moment.      MM is definitely acting. But Smitty is just so passive. It could turn into quiet strength at some point, but for now...passive IMO. 
    • Am I remembering correctly that the Madison's lived in a Spanish revival-style house? I have a vague recollection of the fireplace looking especially Spanish in style. It is unusual that Montecello had so many architectural styles.  Obviously, that might occur IRL.  But, look at other east coast soaps and there is a definitive style that is throughout (because it was styled by a set decorator) regardless of the income of the occupants.
    • @kalbir MSW was a powerhouse for CBS. Angela Lansbury was a superb actress. In 1985, TV viewers were tiring of the primetime soaps and the like. People wanted storytelling and MSW was great at that and had great guest stars. Storytelling -- an amazing and novel concept. CBS Daytime by 1985 was beating ABC so CBS was on the upswing.
    • I'd say just the opposite - conflict means they will find out and then be at odds. For the limited amount of time people on this show have conflict (if they aren't named Nina or Ric, I guess).
    • Totes mcgoats (aka I agree). But, now the character needs to move forward.  Clyde's exit was 12/11/24.  It is May.  She and Chad have been on one date. I don't think they've slept together. And she was only planning on sticking around for a year.
    • That is one of the best insults I've heard in a long time.  I burst out laughing when Kat called Eva that.  LOL Their scenes, of course, were really good.  Colby and Ambyr have so much chemistry.  The only thing I'd change is Kat saying "you're dead to me."  That's a phrase usually said about someone you care about.  I would've preferred something like "You will never be my sister," or something similar to that.  Nice contrast at the end with both mothers/daughters:  Kat comforting/consoling her mother, and Eva being locked out by her mother.  Yeah, I wasn't a big of fan of the singing either, especially after your daughter's life has been destroyed.  What?  LOL And I also agree with those that thought Dana/Leslie's scenes with the Dupree's didn't feel right since Eva is not a Dupree....unless she is.  But as of right now, she's not. 
    • Trisha Mann-Grant, Ambyr Michelle, Sean Freeman are destined for bigger and better things. They need to move on as soon as their initial contracts are done.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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