adam436

I can't say I was that invested in Noah and Hayley much, mostly because I didn't like Hayley. I liked Noah as an individual though. I was probably more invested in Jude and Shauna to be honest. They were a really cute couple and back when Leah was more a fun character. Ada and Ryan had amazing chemistry too! I remember she had a HIV scare after a needle stick injury, and didn't want to marry Vinnie until she was in the clear.

Even the current retcons could have been done without too much effort, but the current producers just don't care. The Martha one would have been better had it been written that Alf told Ailsa about it at the time and she agreed to keep it a secret. She more than anyone knows the need to run away and start afresh. The Marilyn/Heather one would have worked had it happened after Byron and Donald, rather than before and make a mockery of their journey.

Edward has always been one of my favourites too. His diagnosis meant he couldn't stay forever, but it would have been nice to see him for another couple of years. A number of good characters were wiped out as part of that cast overhaul, but Edward was definitely the one I felt shortchanged with the most.

We have recently been reminded, it's been 25 years since Leah first appeared on Home and Away. 2000 is probably one of the biggest years of change, so I thought I'd start a new thread to discuss and appreciate everything that happened in that season. For me, many of the events that occurred marked the end of the era: The revamped theme music and opening credits. The first version not to feature the "action" shots, and instead the floating boxes across the ocean background. The demise of the Bayside Diner and the original Stewart home, and the introducing of the replacement Beachside Diner. Ailsa's death. Sam's exit, after watching him grow up on screen for 9 years. The arrival of the Sutherland family into Summer Bay House, well and truly heralding a new era of H&A. One of, if not the, biggest year for cast turnover. The new arrivals were Nick, Leah, the Sutherland family, Noah, Jude and Brodie. The departures were Jesse, Justine, James, Sam, Joel, Natalie, Tom, Ken, Edward, Peta, Judith and then Ailsa in the finale. Admittedly many of those characters were relatively short-lived, but it was still a rollercoaster year for comings and goings, especially when you consider the show lost hugely popular characters like Marilyn, Travis, Rebecca and Chloe in late 1999 as well. Iconic storylines/moments: Sally's non-wedding and all the returnees it brought. Jesse's exit Shauna being revealed as Ailsa's daughter. Great storyline, but it's a shame we only got a few months of their relationship before Ailsa died. The landside, which used as the cliffhanger when the show went on hiatus for the Sydney Olympics. At the time, it was reportedly the biggest stunt H&A had ever done, but it pales in comparison to some of the ones that occurred in later years, but at the time it was pretty epic and high stakes drama. Edward's Huntington's journey Ken Smith's death Forgettable storylines/low points: The Diner fire - Considering it was one of the most iconic sets from the early years, it's actual demise felt rather underwhelming. Maybe it was too close to the landside or they didn't have the budget for a second big stunt? Natalie's affair and pregnancy. What was the point, when they were just going to reunite and get back together a few months later? Even if they wrote the affair as her exit storyline to later reunite with Joel, the pregnancy wasn't needed at all Fisher's dream sequence - Fisher had a weird dream that he was marrying Judith Joel and Judith's romance - clearly just a fill-in story to give both characters something to do after their families left and while they sat around waiting around for their exits.

That era had a higher turnover of cast with the likes of Emma, Viv, Grant, Ben, Karen, Simon, Haydn and others lasting less than 18 months. They definitely wanted more from Craig and Dannii, so the producers must have been disappointed they had relatively short stints. Craig had already done 3 years on a soap, so he'd have been unlikely to do another 3 when his career was just taking off. As for Richard Norton, he didn't exactly set the world on fire on Neighbours so I don't know what they were expecting from him on H&A.

I imagine the 3 of them would have been laughing all the way to the bank given how little they all had in terms of storylines in the first half of the 90s. It wasn't until 1995 when Alf and Ailsa got their own storylines and Donald got involved with Marilyn that they were actually at the forefront again.

I never knew about that! I knew Ray was one of the highest paid stars, but I didn't realise the negotiations started that early. I always assumed Ray's high salary only started after Judy and Norman left because he became more "valuable" as he became 1 of 2, and eventually the sole survivor. Interesting it says "among others" - aside from a young Kate Ritchie, they were the only original cast members still standing by the time Nicolle Dickson left. Given the discrepancy in exits (4 years between Justine and Nicolle), it's difficult to know whether this happened in early 1990s or the mid 1990s. If it's the former, I wonder if Roger and Vanessa were part of that and led to the exits of Roger and Vanessa if they weren't happy with the deal. If it's the latter, you would assume the "others" would be Debra and Dennis. They weren't original cast members, but certainly valuable as the central parent figures on the show.

I'd agree with that. Pippa and Michael never felt like they had equal value as characters in the same way Tom and Pippa did. It could just be a case of Pippa being there first, therefore the producers valued her more, but it did feel like the writers often treated him as "Pippa's husband" rather than a character in his right (if that makes sense). Pippa would have remarried eventually, but I don't think it would have been as quick. And I imagine Pippa1's new husband would have been a very different character to Michael, but I could be wrong. I just can't picture marrying Pippa1 marrying Michael, she'd have wanted a more lighter and fun character, whereas Michael always felt so serious. Pippa2 always seemed more joyless and serious, so her and Michael worked well together.

Rob seemed to be one of those characters that worked with anyone. Irene in home scenes, Donald and the teens in school scenes, and Donna and Travis as his friendship group. It was a shame he and Donna left so soon, as they were both two of the better twentysomethings from the early years. It's a shame they never got their happy ending either.

I never liked Michael, but I can see why some view it as a mistake. When Tom was killed off, the producers opted to marry Pippa off within a year. I don't know if that was always the plan or whether the producers realised that the foster family worked better with two parents. If it was the latter, then the producers clearly learnt nothing. If Pippa had stayed longer than she did, then it would have been mistake, but when you consider she left less than 2 years later, it didn't bother me either way. I do wonder if the producers ever considered leaving Michael's death "open-ended". Neighbours did this with Harold after Ian Smith was axed - apparently one writer believed it was a mistake to kill off Harold, so they left the door open for him to return.

Do you know when that was? We had Tom and OG Pippa exit in 1990, so I assume it must have been after that.

I suspect the producers wanted Dannii/Emma to stay longer than she did. They might have got a couple of extra months out of her, but I think she would have suffered post-high school like so many teenage characters tended to, that perhaps it's best she left on a high. With Viv gone, Steven on his way out and the next generation (Blake, Karen, Sophie) having arrived, it felt like the right time for her to go. Her exit did feel rushed though.

Me too. Gordon could have worked long-term as a JR Ewing/Mr Burns/Paul Robinson type villain, with Stacey perhaps as his voice of reason/moral compass. But with the lack of creativity of the writers when it came to the Macklin Corporation, it may have been best to rest it when they did. I also quite liked Brett too - he was better eye candy (for me anyway!) than most of the regular males in the 80s

I was reading it on IMDB recently. I can certainly see the similarities between Ross' Ted Bullpitt and early years Alf. They were both prejudice, chauvinistic, hot-headed and authoritarian father figures. Both characters also their own unique catch phrases too. Perhaps too similar to be played by the same actor. We also don't know if Ray would not have stayed as long by choice had he been playing Tom either. Tom was more of a cookie-cutter father figure compared to Alf so Ray may not have enjoyed playing Tom as much, or maybe he preferred playing a supporting character over the main one. I recall somewhere (possibly the This is Your Life special?) that Ray initially only intended to stay short-term, so maybe playing Tom would have cemented that intention.

Funnily enough, Ross Higgins auditioned for the role of Alf, so I do wonder if Alf was initially meant to have a similar Ted Bullpitt vibe abiut him on paper in terms of Alf's views, mannerisms and temper. Ray Meagher initially auditioned for or was offered Tom Fletcher, so Ray would have brought a very different performance to that character than what Roger did had had it gone ahead. Alf was a relatively pleasant/mild character in the pilot and he ultimately went on to be the central patriarch figure 20 years later, so I could definitely see it working, but ultimately Ray and Roger were perfect in the roles they eventually played.

That all sounds very 1994 - probably the least dramatic season of H&A to date I think another reason we never see "fiery" Alf anymore is because he has little reason to fired up. Whenever he did in the past, it's because people he was sticking up for those he cared about - punching Don for reporting Curtis, Sally's non-wedding to Kieran, defending Ailsa and Roo in 1988 etc. Given the only characters that would get him that fired up now (Roo, Marilyn and to a lesser extent, Leah) don't really get themselves in situations that warrant it, that side of Alf has little reason to come out.

Well there's no youth for him to complain about anymore

I don't know who was responsible for the hiring decisions at Macklins (was it Tom or head office/Gordon?), but given Roo's history with both the Macklins and the Fletchers, it's an achievement to get a job there after failing the HSC as well

To be honest, I think Alf and Ailsa's personality shift that you described was a result of actually giving them storylines. Alf and Ailsa had a big 1988 and 1989 (the reveal of Ailsa's past, the early years of their relationship and Roo's interference, Ailsa's pregnancy and post-natal depression), then they slipped into the background for most of the early 1990s. With the 1995 revamp, they were pushed to the forefront again for the next few years - we learned they both had a secret child, Ailsa had a few mental health issues, Alf had a few health issues (his heart mostly, I think?), Ailsa was terrorised by her estranged brother, the car accident which lead to Ailsa's paranoia that Alf was trying to kill her, Duncan was SORASed into a terror teenage, and I feel like Curtis was more of a wild child than most of their previous intakes (Emma, Blake, Simon, Sarah) so he didn't give them much to smile about either. I also remember they had a marriage separation/breakdown at one stage too - I can't remember what caused them to separate, but I remember Alf was staying in a caravan and met a blind lady played by Belinda Giblin. Other than the brain tumour story, Alf didn't do a great deal in those years though. All his family were gone and he lived in a flat above the diner on his own for the most part - Seb and Martha lived with him briefly, but he felt very much a supporting character again. It wasn't until they moved him into Summer Bay House with Sally and her family hat he really embraced the grandfatherly role, and he's pretty much stayed there since.

I guess it wasn't too much of an issue because most younger characters were generally either leaving whilst still at school, or pretty soon after. Chloe, Selina, Shannon, Sally, Carly, Shane and Angel, Bobby and later Will, Hayley, Dani, Gypsy stuck around for a long time with mixed outcomes. Bobby owned the diner (as opposed to just working there), Selina became a trainee nurse, Sally went to uni and eventually a teacher, who at least did something different. I honestly can't remember if the others did anything different to working at the diner. Most of the other teens either left whilst still at school, or moving away for university straight after school was their exit story (Steven, Justine, Damien).

Would Matt have just morphed into the emotionally abusive husband that Ben was for the sake of the story though? Maybe the producers thought there was just too much history with Carly and Matt they wanted her to have a "fresh start" with someone new.

I think there are several factors as to why it was dropped. The show was also trying to pivot to a "sexier" image by 1989/1990, so the Macklin Corporation didn't really fit in with that. Also, the corporate world seemed like a very 80s thing for soaps, so maybe they were trying to move with or ahead of the times by dropping it when they did. All the characters initially involved in it - Tom, Frank, Roo, Stacey - were all gone, so it made sense in a way to phase out that aspect too. Would the Macklin Corporation have been kept in the show had Roger Oakley not been written out? Maybe - even we didn't really see it onscreen or only saw it when Tom had a work-based story. Another factor is that storylines were pretty much exhausted. You've listed everything the Macklin Corporation were involved in, so what else could they do? I've suggested before that Gordon Macklin could have been a full-time villain in the series (a JR Ewing/Mr Burns kind of figure), but now you've highlighted what they actually did, it would have got old pretty quickly.

I am in two minds here. Alf was often written as hot-headed and an authoritarian father figure when it came to Roo and his family, plus we had the story with Roo's boyfriend where he came across as racist. But on the other hand, he was always Mr Reliable, on hand to help out the Fletchers where there was a crisis or they needed an extra pair of hands, and we saw his softer side with Ailsa in the early days of their romance. Weirdly, I actually 80s/90s Alf more likeable than the current character. I'm not sure why - maybe it's because he had Ailsa to compliment him. He currently feels like a watered-down version of early years Alf. Once Ailsa died, Alf kind of transitioned into more of a grandfatherly role, especially once he moved into Summer Bay House and we had all the young waifs and strays come through under the care of Sally, Miles, Roo and Leah and Zac. It was a natural progression for the character, but he's certainly lost that "edge" that he had in the early years. I can't really comment on anything between mid 1990 and late 1994, as I've not watched most of that, but I think by 1995 when it became obvious he was going to be one of the long-term characters they had started to iron out the kinks in his character without him losing his "edge".

I liked Andrew as a character, but her never seemed suited to Carly or Stacey

I can see both sides of the argument there. A shorter hiatus can actually help a return be more successful, such as with Marilyn and Steven in 1995, or Kirsty in 2008. Whereas Steven or Kirsty have become so irrelevant as characters now I think their return would make no sense storyline-wise because they have no strong ties to the current characters. And I assume that the core demographic of H&A has changed so much that most viewers would have no idea who they are, so the buzz and excitement generated from the news would be much less. I was a little apprehensive about Marilyn's 2010 return for that reason. Thankfully she close to the two remaining characters from her previous stint (though from memory, she didn't even share that many scenes with Irene early in her return!), but otherwise there had been a complete turnover from cast in absence, so I was a bit worried the writers would have to shoehorn her into a cast and she'd be written out after a year because her return was a flop, Luckily it paid off, and she's still around 15 years later. Many of the early 2000s returnees like Celia, Sophie, Frank, Martin and Lance had been absent for 10 or more years when they returned, so I think there was a certain buzz about them coming back.