CaptainHulk Posted February 7 Report Share Posted February 7 11 hours ago, cymbaline said: Was abandoning Sam twice and having that affair really out of character? Greg was a shallow sort of person and when he was married to Bobby, she was the one doing the heavy lifting. Even though he was quick to look for custody of Sam, he was found wanting when he finally got sole custody. I think him leaving to drive trucks again was very in character. Even when he came back and gave Sam the option of moving in with him and his fiancée, it was still a half-baked offer. There were some really sweet scenes when Donald and Sam finally admitted how much they cared about each other. Now that would've been an interesting turn of events. When they originally had Jackie give Sam up, the story was very much weighted in favour of Bobby. It was all about how heartbroken she was, and how she and Sam had bonded and should be together. They glossed over Jackie and simply painted her as an immature party girl who didn't have the self-discipline to look after Sam properly. Even though she wasn't the best mother in the world, she wasn't a bad person. Would she have been a better mum a few years later? Who knows? It would've been fun to find out. Ryan Clark seems to be a nice chap but as an actor, he was never in Kate Ritchie's league. Was he really that indispensable? He was popular with female fans and generally liked on set by most accounts but when the surf called age 17 in 2000, off he went to be a lifeguard however did a looong farewell guest stint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam436 Posted February 7 Report Share Posted February 7 I think indespensible in that he survived Bobby and Greg, and then Pippa leaving, when he could have been written out with either of them. Maybe the producers had decided that as Kate Ritchie was getting older, they needed another child actor to fill that void. I'd say by 1998 he'd come into his own, but in 1993 the Marshalls could easily have been written out as a family unit (as opposed to killing off Bobby) and I doubt anyone would have been upset to see Sam go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Forever Missed Posted February 7 Report Share Posted February 7 5 minutes ago, adam436 said: I think indespensible in that he survived Bobby and Greg, and then Pippa leaving, when he could have been written out with either of them. Maybe the producers had decided that as Kate Ritchie was getting older, they needed another child actor to fill that void. I'd say by 1998 he'd come into his own, but in 1993 the Marshalls could easily have been written out as a family unit (as opposed to killing off Bobby) and I doubt anyone would have been upset to see Sam go. Bobby would never have left the bay though, her roots and friends were all there killing her was the only realistic exit also bare in mind Nicolle asked that Bobby be killed off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nenehcherry2 Posted February 7 Report Share Posted February 7 (edited) 34 minutes ago, Bobby Forever Missed said: Bobby would never have left the bay though, her roots and friends were all there killing her was the only realistic exit also bare in mind Nicolle asked that Bobby be killed off Agreed. Plus the fact that Ailsa railroading her into a boring business seemed to suck all of the career ambition & drive out of her. 41 minutes ago, adam436 said: I think indespensible in that he survived Bobby and Greg, and then Pippa leaving, when he could have been written out with either of them. Maybe the producers had decided that as Kate Ritchie was getting older, they needed another child actor to fill that void. I'd say by 1998 he'd come into his own, but in 1993 the Marshalls could easily have been written out as a family unit (as opposed to killing off Bobby) and I doubt anyone would have been upset to see Sam go. Also agreed. Sam was blatantly bought in to be the new "little kid who'll grow up on this show" once Sally hit her teens (i.e. I suspect that they wanted to repeat that cyclic theme once again). As someone else stated, Ryan's overall acting range wasn't quite in the Kate Ritchie league (although I still LOVE his performances when Bobby and then Michael died). Edited February 7 by nenehcherry2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHulk Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 With the diner thing, As I said before Bobby needed direction post-High school and while she probably *did* have the grades for Uni, it wasn't her scene. With Sam's introduction it was no secret they needed a kid character to pass the stick to as Sal was going through a transitional period (Year 6, Puberty, Bras and the like) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam436 Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 10 hours ago, CaptainHulk said: With the diner thing, As I said before Bobby needed direction post-High school and while she probably *did* have the grades for Uni, it wasn't her scene. It could have been an interesting story to go down though - Bobby struggling to fit in and adjust to uni, standing up to lecturers etc. I guess you could argue it would just be repeating her Year 12 though, but it could have been a catalyst for her and Frank's marriage ending. Are Sam and Bobby the only child characters to ever be credited as full-time cast? If they are, it's interesting that they were both among the longest-running characters in the show's history, rather than them staying for 2-3 years before leaving to focus on their schooling etc. The only other characters I can think of never had regular stints in their child years - Dylan Parrish, Rachel McGregor, Christopher Fletcher, Duncan Stewart, VJ Patterson, despite the child actors remaining in the role for a long time and some of them appearing somewhat frequently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nenehcherry2 Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 (edited) 15 minutes ago, adam436 said: It could have been an interesting story to go down though - Bobby struggling to fit in and adjust to uni, standing up to lecturers etc. I guess you could argue it would just be repeating her Year 12 though, but it could have been a catalyst for her and Frank's marriage ending. Are Sam and Bobby the only child characters to ever be credited as full-time cast? If they are, it's interesting that they were both among the longest-running characters in the show's history, rather than them staying for 2-3 years before leaving to focus on their schooling etc. The only other characters I can think of never had regular stints in their child years - Dylan Parrish, Rachel McGregor, Christopher Fletcher, Duncan Stewart, VJ Patterson, despite the child actors remaining in the role for a long time and some of them appearing somewhat frequently. Not being pedantic but just HAD to point out your putting "Bobby" as opposed to Sally on your point about credited child characters. Only because the pure concept made me smile... Edited February 8 by nenehcherry2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHulk Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 46 minutes ago, adam436 said: It could have been an interesting story to go down though - Bobby struggling to fit in and adjust to uni, standing up to lecturers etc. I guess you could argue it would just be repeating her Year 12 though, but it could have been a catalyst for her and Frank's marriage ending. Are Sam and Bobby the only child characters to ever be credited as full-time cast? If they are, it's interesting that they were both among the longest-running characters in the show's history, rather than them staying for 2-3 years before leaving to focus on their schooling etc. The only other characters I can think of never had regular stints in their child years - Dylan Parrish, Rachel McGregor, Christopher Fletcher, Duncan Stewart, VJ Patterson, despite the child actors remaining in the role for a long time and some of them appearing somewhat frequently. Duncan was forcibly aged up from 9 to 12 in 1998 when he got out of hospital following his accident and didn't make the opening credits until 1999. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old H&A Fan Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, CaptainHulk said: Duncan was forcibly aged up from 9 to 12 in 1998 when he got out of hospital following his accident and didn't make the opening credits until 1999. That was some mistake, wasn't it! It's times like that I seriously think the story writers have really "lost the plot", to pardon the pun. Why do they do this???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHulk Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, Old H&A Fan said: That was some mistake, wasn't it! It's times like that I seriously think the story writers have really "lost the plot", to pardon the pun. Why do they do this???? They probably got fed up of waiting for Lewis to age so in steps Brendan who's good few years older and would be more believable as a "Satan Spawn". 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.