nenehcherry2

At one time, Ailsa would have helped out here and there. But the character had become so grumpy towards and detached from teenagers by that time that it wouldn't have felt right. Besides, she was always complaining by then about how busy she was with "the diner, Alf, Duncan, Curtis" (Yadda Yadda). And it felt so out of character that Don didn't step in where there was a risk of Sam being fostered elsewhere. Especially as he was by that time married to Maz & talking babies. The writers pretty much forgot about Sam and Don's connection for a few years, didn't they?

I think you're right there. I know some of the soap mags at the time (the bastions of scriptural "canon" that they were. NOT!) were writing about "Pippa's senile Dad comes to stay after a dementia diagnosis!" but I re-watched some 95 recently and don't actually recall a direct mention of it. But I could have easily missed it.

I think she had the most chemistry with Alan and with Danny. The worst Bobby romance for me was with Geoff. So painful to watch her forcing herself to like a man who wasn't her type in any shape or form whilst he was, genuinely, a nice guy. Greg and Frank were both just very meh for me.

Totally agree. Bobby was on fire in 88 and (in a pretty different way) later 89-early 92. Being the (quite rightly since they both treated her like a doormat) nagging, strong-minded wife to two very chauvinistic, self-centred men became tired very quickly in each instance.

I didn't rate Frank much as a character. He's very much a plot device for Roo's plotting (pun intended) and then straight into the equally strong-minded Bobby. Just the romantic male foil to the two strong female leads of the show at that point. In addition there was also something about Alex's acting for me which didn't gel with the writing. It's like he has this condescending tone in his line delivery towards his co-stars which doesn't match how he's supposed to be perceived by the audience (presumably as boy next door, prince charming, Mr Nice Guy yadda Yadda). Something just doesn't work for me. It was like the writers noticed Papps' moodiness and aloofness so finally bought those traits into the writing in his 92 return. I totally agree RE his chemistry with Bobby vs. Roo. I loved Bobby on her own the best. She didn't need a man by her side and none of her screen husbands or boyfriends bought out her best (just my own opinion).

Totally agree with you as always, Adam! I actually don't mind seeing Martin and Lance in individual scenes with other characters at all. Those moments showed their long-term promise. But their (90% of the time) interdependency, as well as the silly, recycled storylines they co-played, was what bugged me. And drove the fast forwarding! I don't think fish funerals, pop groups & hot dog stands did them any favours with the audience (it was all tired by the end of the first season alone). Speaking of 89/90 Maz, the character is so daft, random and one dimensional until those two buggered off (except for maybe the stuff with Morag). She almost comes across as something like Bubble off Absolutely Fabulous but not as funny. Just very random indeed. Of course, she truly came into her own as soon as they left and quickly became a classic stalwart of the show.

Bert King. World's first and only ever known case of curable dementia.

Howie was Series Producer from ep 261 to end of 92 but then promoted to Exec Producer from the start of 93 to later 94. According to the credits at least. So his overall role in the show goes further back than 1993. Interviews from the time would suggest that Monaghan was pretty hands-off as far as Exec Producers go, meaning that Andrew Howie's influence likely defined that entire 89-94 period. Also, there was no Series Producer in that time when Howie was Exec (presumably due to the recession?). So he was likely "double hatting" & still very hands on, compared with Des' approach of delegation of authority. Greg Stevens was Script Producer for the entire late 89 - early 95 period (with various sidekicks over that period including John Hugginson & Boaz Stark), so another common denominator. Compare his storylining approach with the Bevan Lee era of 0 - 280.

You and I are 1 million per cent aligned here my friend! Just like yourself, I tend to categorise eras by storytelling / plot writing method more than actor presences. And, to your point, that was driven primarily by the series producer. Also, Greg Stevens was script producer between late 89 - just before Shane & Angel's wedding. I feel like his writing style was very, ahem, simple. Very straightforward, no twists, sudden shocks or turns. And none of the "mysticism" that we saw hints of in 88 and the show became synonymous with again post-Bobby fridge. Compared to 89/9 stories like Bobbygate (the Don reveal), the Nutter, Dodge, Floss' prediction etc and equally compared to the mid-late 90s with the likes of Sally (then Stephanie) being reincarnated, the cult, Ailsa holding Alf hostage etc. None of these stories would have happened in that Greg Stevens period. I mean, back to my example... There's very little cast difference between the very beginning and the very end of '95. Yet it's like comparing night and day. Country and western contest rivalries and paper round thefts to HIV scares & cults.

Fully agree. Can't stand long-winded coma stories like Emily Shadwick's.

Totally agree but my point is that without Dale's and Bobby's deaths (and the spin-off stories they generated), 93 would arguably have just been another 94.

Totally agree. I'd say that the entirety of 1990-early 95 is a very calm, conservative, "down to earth" period on the whole in terms of stories & dramatic balance. Basically, the Andrew Howie years. With the exception of the Karen/Redhead/Sophie/David/Tamara arc, the other big stories are very reactive to actors leaving, getting pregnant, ratings etc (for example, they only wrote Meg's cancer because the show went head to head with Neighbours on the Aussie timeslots; H&A won the battle). Otherwise, it's generally non-offensive, short little stories which don't really go anywhere in the long-term. 1994 especially suffers from this lack of drama since there was little for the writers to react to, hence the renewed comedy focus. Whereas, to your point, everything from Laura getting trained to the end of the millennium is non-stop high drama. It's amazing to compare the said differences and thus evaluate the impact that the 95 revamp had. I watched the 95 season return ep the other week and it has FAR more in common with say 1990 episodes than how the show was by the time of the 96 return. Far more.

That would DEFINITELY never happen now!

I fully agree with your point here. Some actors choose to be killed off because, at that point in time, they don't want to have the temptation of going back. I have read a couple of interviews from the time where Nicolle ("Nicky") pretty much says thàt. But she foresaw a long-term acting career (once she'd had kids, which she did within a couple of years of leaving) which sadly never came to fruition. So perhaps she might regret making the kill-off request in hindsight. Also, let's not forget that death makes drama, even if short-term. Bobby's death (perhaps reinforced by the fridge!) made her even more iconic. I still know so many people, 30 years on, who remember watching the machine being switched off. Again, she likely foresaw that this would help to make Nicolle's brand even more memorable to casting directors of other shows.

She took six weeks off (in addition to the six weeks regular Christmas leave). This was written as her going to stay with her parents between 1153-1186 (and she had Dale off-screen, the labour scene in 1175 was an insert filmed before her maternity though it started a rumour that they'd filmed Grace's real-life birth - which Debra denied in an old interview on this site). The mention of her "history of high blood pressure during pregnancy" (by Bobby) was actually in the build-up to her going to Coral's. It really comes across as the 93 writers suddenly being told about the 88 storyline which they weren't aware of and throwing it in loosely.

True. And Grace Coard likely would never have been born since Dennis and Debra met on the show. I wonder if a big storyline would have been planned for 1993 had a) Debra not conceived and b) Nicolle not quit. Both storylines were reactive to external events. If you minus out Dale and Bobby's deaths (and the spin-off stories they generated), 93's almost 94 level uneventful.

Other than Don saying "I could give you a good bloody nose for what you've done!" in the initial aftermath, there was little reaction to his behaviour other than from Bobby & Tug. Even Alf didn't flip (yet he threw out Fiona from the Store, as if it doesn't take two to tango). So you have everyone from Pippa, Adam, Nick, Ailsa, Don and Alf calling out Bob for being stubborn in not taking him back without calling him out for making her so angry! And Nick's hypocrisy at covering for Greg has always bugged me. Given his longer friendship with Bobby and what he'd been through with the Loo & Ryan, she was too right to blow up at him over that. I never liked Frank either. I think Bobby was too good for both of them and I much preferred her character single. Like Irene, she suited being single and independent.

I agree RE Tom. I think Roger Oakley plays a very good role but I just find the character to be very textbook foster Dad. Whenever the kids had a problem, it was always "the department have guidelines about this, here's a video to watch" or "Pip and I stand by all of our kids, always". Although, at the same time, he could also be very neanderthal RE womens' rights etc. Whereas Michael has more flaws, makes more mistakes, blows his fuse a lot. Perhaps because he didn't enter into fostering in the same way that Tom did, so was being shown to be a bit of a rookie in that sense with less empathy for the kids' backstories. Thrown in with regrets about failures with his own two kids. More interesting to watch for me. Especially as it always made Pippa look like the expert (this was all pretty much mentioned in their marriage guidance counselling sessions). Never mind the age of consent, the marriageable age in 1988 was 16 for girls and 18 for boys. It only changed to 18 for both genders in 91.

Will, Sam, Gypsy, Hayley, Edward, Peta & Mitch were all supposed to be in the same year (11 in 99, 12 in 00) but Mitch was repeating the previous year (so in 11 in 00). Hayley then repeated some year 12 subjects in 01 and ended up in a class with Noah (her age, he'd had a year out of high school). Gypsy (and Will to an extent) looked so much older than Sam & Hayley (presumably due to the actors' real ages). Duncan getting his own peer group in 00 represented the "disneyfication" of H&A for me. We'd seen Sally & Sam on their own at that age and were essentially loners until they hit year 10 (if we really want to geek out, Sal skipped a year for Maths only in 95 to be in a classroom with the core teen gang). But, to see 4 year 8 aged characters all at once in Duncan/Jade/Nick/Kirsty was a bit overpowering for me (the irony being that they were my age). Clearly TPTB realised that such a strong focus on 12-14 year old characters didn't work as Max was a loner in the Sally/Sam sense when he came on the scene.

Greg & Fiona was the only one I know of pre-2000 in the married sense. It was implied that they'd slept together a couple of times. And, unmarried wise, Ryan & Loo. I personally don't see Roo/Frank as an affair. They realised that they were still in love (after he'd already started to conclude that he didn't love Bobby after all), had one kiss in the office (raises eyebrows like that annoying presenter on the 2000 episodes special video), told Bobby very quickly that they were still in love and then left together (when Frank already had a job offer). But they weren't sneaking around and sleeping in hotel rooms behind Bobby's back for weeks on end.

Grace Coard technically owes her life to Roger Oakley... Roger Oakley quits (or was axed) - Vanessa quits since she misses working with him - Debra replaces her, Dennis is casted, they meet on set, fall in love, marry & she's pregnant with Grace almost immediately! Debra has confirmed in interviews that Dale was written in last minute because of her own pregnancy & her announcing that to the producers 3 months in. The scenes where she first announced her pregnancy (around the time Maz leaves) look like last minute inserts. And then there isn't a mention of it again for several weeks (i.e. scripts written weeks before). Be interesting to know how soon after the production team decided to do the cot death story and why. Must have been quite a sensitive concept to pitch to Debra & Dennis given the obvious. My guess RE the why was to get the ratings in when there wasn't much else going on drama wise.

I do agree with this idea of showing the humanness of Tom, Michael or Pip by them having an affair BUT (cue a shameless digression!)I also love the fact that Michael & Pip's temporary separation didn't involve an affair. VERY unusual for a soap to focus on a breakup which WASN'T caused by an affair but was simply a case of two individuals forgetting how to communicate with one another. This (and their gradual reconciliation) is far more reflective of true life situations where affairs or lies are not nearly as always involved as television would lead us to believe.

One for me is the Pippa/Zac storyline. Or more how Tom and the other characters react to it. It's partly very bad writing (especially the likes of Bobby & Ailsa acting so out of character) but the attitudes of some of the male characters is very of the time in their refusal to believe Pippa. Whilst it isn't a popular storyline (and clearly very badly written filler in a low period of the show), I personally find the concept of Zac very fascinating. And I think the actor played the part very well. It just could have been explored so differently & had a more long-term impact on Pip. It highlighted the fact that Pippa was still a young, attractive woman. And just as vulnerable to a (very hunky, let's be honest) sex pest like Zak (precisely what he was) as the even younger women were. There are men out there like Zak who sexually harass & chase women in such a pushy, aggressive manner. Her being a saintly foster mother didn't exclude her. THAT was a fascinating context, for me anyway. In 2023, I'd like to imagine that Tom (especially), Alf etc (and perhaps Pippa herself) would be written as immediately seeing Zak for what he truly was & there being some consequences for him in the follow-through. Thus, the angle of it being a "no one believes that I'm not having an affair" probably wouldn't have happened, nor the storyline lasting only 15 episodes. The 89/90 incarnation of the story is simply appalling to watch and goes nowhere at all (and perhaps hard to believe it would be written with Debra Lawrence in the role, no offence to her). For instance, why didn't Pippa mention it a couple of years later in the Sophie story (predicts a response to this comment from one specific forum member!)?

For me, the 90s-mid 00s "teen gang" formula wasn't set in stone until Sophie/Blake/Karen/Haydn joined. Before this, the show could easily have just added even more characters in Carly & Bobby's age bracket (besides Adam & Maz) to "grow" with them & have the show evolve to be even more 20s/30s-centric over time. Yes, Viv & Emma were added to spice up Steven (2 years younger) but that doesn't count for me with him being an original character himself. Using budget to bring in 4 fresh teens when the opportunity arose in 90 tested the direction they wanted to take moving forwards. And then repeating (or, should that be, recycling) this casting approach with Shane/Damo/Tug/Sarah/Angel & so on confirmed this format & kept the teenage centricity. Whether that was the initial long-term strategy or not in 88' remains a mystery.

Agree with all of this. I think a lot of it was also that the Producers who came in in late 88 - 89 (Andrew Howie, Des and Greg Stevens) needed a year or so to find their own formula. So they tested the original characters they'd "inherited", removed the ones they didn't like and replaced with the big names. They didn't work out for whatever reason so they went onto bringing in 4-5 year 10s every couple of years or so which saw the show through quite a long time to come. And made all the "sparkier" 88 adults who were still left over back-up foster(ish) parents. And removed a lot of the more 80s elements of the show. By the beginning of 91, this new direction was set in stone I'd say (complete with DebPip and Michael being at the helm).