Daisyap Posted September 28, 2007 Report Posted September 28, 2007 I didn't like Vinnie when he first came into it either but he got much better whn he was with Leah. I liked all the stuff in the early years of Will and Gypsy and when they were all at school with Sam, Peta, Edward etc
claire_louise Posted September 28, 2007 Report Posted September 28, 2007 Watching the early years on five life, I actually think Vinnie was a huge loss to the show. He's really a breath of fresh air in every scene. It's funny how we've all been discussing how the show will change when it's main character (Sally) leaves, but even the loss of a lesser character can have a big impact. As far as the 'dip' goes, I was never a big fan of the Joey/Liam/Tiegan group (I hope I'm talking about the right period here!). Having a strong teen group is hugely important to a show that's largely aimed at young people, and this one never really worked. The individual characters were weak and as a group they had no chemistry. It was just bland. I think Joey's character was really badly written - the mental illness storyline could have been done really well, but he was never portrayed in a way that everyday teens could relate to. Unlike Tasha, for example, who was another 'weird' kid but still had elements of a normal teenager in her.
Angie's Wraith Posted September 28, 2007 Report Posted September 28, 2007 The dip occured because the central core and focus shifted and we needed to adapt to it. Pippa was gone. The Nash's were the new family at the caravan park, and were supposed to hold it together. they did not really do that. Gypsy was fantastic but Tom was awful. Joel and Nat were OK but did not have whatever it is that gives a character, particularly a central character, the X factor and makes us want to watch. I did not think the Sutherlands were any better. I only really started to watch again with any seriousness when Angie arrived and when characters were written with a bit more depth than they had been. They made the same mistake in the late 90's as they are making now. They are going for the big story line but are totally forgetting about characters, and that we know them as friends who we see in our lounge rooms daily. When Sally moved centre stage the show got back its heart, and she had held it despite some awful writing going on around her for other characters. I think that was more down to Kate than to the writing though. I really fear for it when she goes. Who will live at the caravan park? Beth could have held it I think. Irene could, but I would hate to see her leave the beach house. They have got to start writing about the characters, rather than coming up with ideas and chucking the characters at them and expecting them to fit in with whatever they are coming up with.
alexx Posted September 29, 2007 Report Posted September 29, 2007 I don’t agree 98 and 99 were about big storylines and not about characters. It was totally opposite the way I see it. As far as I’m concerned the show took a more definite move away from the character storytelling in 2005 onwards. That’s not to say there haven’t been character focused stuff, I’d say the writers have stuck to it a great deal when it comes to storylines involving Sally, she’s the only one they seem to keep writing with good consistency and continuity. I definitely agree the teens of this era were a lot more 'bland' compared to the teens previously, but they had more individuality to them, bar Tom. I actually think Joey was written really well, he's one of my favourite characters, whilst I actually think Tash was written as such a typical teen clone of the current era She wasn’t written consistently, and did things totally out of what I thought was her original character....guess we all look for different things in out characters.
claire_louise Posted September 29, 2007 Report Posted September 29, 2007 I see what you mean about Tasha being inconsistent sometimes, but I think she was easier to relate to than Joey. She was weird and came from an odd background, but she was still a normal girl underneath. She cared about regular things like clothes and boys, whereas Joey was always too 'out there'. I never really bought his relationship with Tiegan either. Liam and Casey were two more awful characters, and yes, Tom was dreadful.
ter06 Posted September 29, 2007 Report Posted September 29, 2007 I think a lot of it is down to weak characters that were around at the time. Aaron, Justine, Tiegan etc. Remember we had come from an era where Shane, Angel and Shannon weren unstoppable and audiences were hitting 18m in the UK. Then we're hit with the dreary Welles siblings. Bec Cartwright and Kate Ritchie had yet to reach their super star status so there was no one to carry the show. We didnt have a comedy character like Colleen either, unless you count Vinnie, but he annoyed me when he first arrived. The writers were probably trying to find a new direction for the show too with Pippa gone and I think throwing Travis and Rebecca into SBH with all those kids mightn't have been the best idea. Interestingly enough, H&A didn't win any Logies in 97 or 98 so the dip must have been noticed by the public back then and not just now looking back on it.
Perry Posted September 29, 2007 Report Posted September 29, 2007 I don't think Tiegan and Casey were awful characters in fact, Tiegan was one of the best parts of the late 90's. She was alot like Bobby in alot of ways. Her relationship with Joey was cute and alot like Tash and Robbie's. I loved her friendship with Justine. Casey was one of those characters that just as they became interesting they wrote her out but she was forgetfull and not many people that I talk to remember her.
alexx Posted September 30, 2007 Report Posted September 30, 2007 I don’t think Joey was overly ‘out there’ to an extent it was unrealistic anyway, if you consider the type of background he had come from. He had god knows how many siblings all to different mothers, was taught every human outside the commune were corrupt and only out to ruin the human race and the world and so much more…you only have to look at the time in which his father had re-captured him, during the time of Selina’s kidnap, the commune fire….he is a totally screwed up kid and doesn’t know who to believe about who he is and what the world and its inhabitants are truly about, because he gets such conflicting points of views thrown at him left right and centre from everyone he loves, including Saul. There’s a particularly scene during that time in 1997 where he has a ‘mediation therapy’ session with Saul and the rest of the commune, they have incense sticks going, soft music…etc and Saul is totally using reverse psychology on him and screwing him up even more about Paul, Irene, Summer Bay and the commune, and where his place is in the world, Joey is left totally drained and delusionally sobbing in Saul’s arms back and forth, as Saul whispers ‘its alright Joey, your home now…your safe I just think he was a totally unique yet really believable character, imo realistic considering how sheltered he was…of course we don’t all meet people like him every day, but I’ve definitely seen similar kids out there on documentary’s who have been secluded and sheltered out in cults in the dessert etc Joey seemed to carry on trying to be a ‘normal teenager’, having his first taste of ‘meat’, learning the way of Summer Bay life/the world, yet he always remained true to character and his path to insanity only seems natural, especially since he was addicted to weed too.
Zippy Posted September 30, 2007 Report Posted September 30, 2007 I liked the teenage characters back then, as they were a bit more real than todays teenagers, who are not a lot more than caricatures of todays "image" of teenagers as touted by the teen magazines. There was more individuality then. Today being an individual seems to be frowned on. They turned Robbie and Tasha into teen zombies for a while, and totally ruined them. Belle started as unique bit they are turning her into one too. Its like if you are unique you have to conform and be like everyone else in Summer Bay and then that means you have grown and are now OK. They used to share the story lines around. Today they do not. They give them to whom so ever is deemed to be the flavour of the month and then flog that persons image in the magazines. I hate that. It is so insulting to the intelligence of the viewers. The dip was down to average writing and thrashing around trying to find a formula which worked. It was not as awful as it sounds, and was no where near as bad as Neighbours, but the tide did not really turn until Coral Drouyn came in 2001/2 and they got back to writing about the characters and when new characters were individuals, not variations on a theme. They lost their way when Pippa went. They tried to push Travis, Rebecca, Natalie, Joel, and a few others into the spot light far too quickly and it zonked out. Sally works today in a fashion as the heart of the show, but she has become a drudge. Alf lost his sparkle too in the late 90's. There were some good things during that period though. Diana's clashes with Irene were great. Saul was sensational. Robert was scary. Gypsy was amazing. Will was wonderful. Hayley was boring .
claire_louise Posted September 30, 2007 Report Posted September 30, 2007 I'm sure that Joey was a perfectly realistic character considering his history, but because the teenagers watching the show didn't have that sort of history it was hard for them to relate to him, and I think one of the most important things about the teen group is that viewers can see themselves in them. He was definitely an interesting character, but the producers tried to lump him in with the other kids when he just wasn't like them.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.