|
||||||||
Hollyoaks-inconsistent |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 13,401
|
Hollyoaks-inconsistent
I think Hollyoaks is so much better now than what it was when the awful Lucy Allan was in charge. Paul Marguess has brought Hollyoaks back with some great new characters and stories such as Brendan and his and Ste's story, the Costellos and the transgender plot, but for how good the show is,its been ruined by such inconsistency.
Firstly there was the mess that was fire week that apparently Channel 4 paid alot of money in order to promote the week of episodes only for them to be cut short and instead fire week turned in to about two and a half episodes, then it was revealed that Dom was the culprit, which was utterly laughable and since he has been arrested hasnt been mentioned since by Tony or anyone, infact i dont even remember any reaction from the likes of Gilly or Frankie that Dom had started the fire and killed steph, i also dont get the whole revenge plot against Tony, so stupid then you have warren and cheryl, two people that had never shared a scene together but then its revealed they are together with absolute no build up at all, throw in the mess of the Sharpes who were awful, the sudden exits of characters such as Rob its a surprise that the show hasnt falllen any further. I know Lucy Allan was utter crap but at least it remained consistent and if Marguess was sacked by C4 then i guess it was down to that and, hopefully the new boss will put things in order a bit more and then Hollyoaks really could be the best soap on TV again there is the return of Warren, I think it was a good move to bring him |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2,697
|
I'd guess Tony's ashamed/upset that Dom did it and it's a touchy subject. But we did she Warren teasing him about it and he's been going to see Dom in present. That was only one mention but it'd get bloomin' annoying if they were all like how's Dom? after he was responsibly for Steph&Mal's death. I'll give you lack of horrified reactions from Frankie etc..
The fire was also only ever meant to last two episodes, the only thing was that they were said to be on different days than they actually were - I think it was meant to be wed/thurs when it was tues/wed? (not 100%) The departure of the Sharpes was a good move, they were awful and it got them off the screen so really he deserves an award imo I know you're not saying it shouldn't have been done but I think it's better that they got rid of them sharpish (pardon the pun) rather than us having to wait for ages when they knew we didn't want that.
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 53,967
|
It's inconsistent I agree, but then again having recently skimmed through the "Hollyoaks: Losing the Will to Stick With it" it's amazing how quickly I'd forgotten the real lows of Lucy Allan's era. I care and am interested in Paul's storylines and characters whereas I can barely think of any storyline I liked during the LA era.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,290
|
The inconsistency/cuts are the only thing letting down PM's side, otherwise it has been brilliant.
I think a lot of people who criticise the show have forgotten how bad it was when Lucy Allan was producer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 381
|
Quote:
I think Hollyoaks is so much better now than what it was when the awful Lucy Allan was in charge. Paul Marguess has brought Hollyoaks back with some great new characters and stories such as Brendan and his and Ste's story, the Costellos and the transgender plot, but for how good the show is,its been ruined by such inconsistency.
Firstly there was the mess that was fire week that apparently Channel 4 paid alot of money in order to promote the week of episodes only for them to be cut short and instead fire week turned in to about two and a half episodes, then it was revealed that Dom was the culprit, which was utterly laughable and since he has been arrested hasnt been mentioned since by Tony or anyone, infact i dont even remember any reaction from the likes of Gilly or Frankie that Dom had started the fire and killed steph, i also dont get the whole revenge plot against Tony, so stupid then you have warren and cheryl, two people that had never shared a scene together but then its revealed they are together with absolute no build up at all, throw in the mess of the Sharpes who were awful, the sudden exits of characters such as Rob its a surprise that the show hasnt falllen any further. I know Lucy Allan was utter crap but at least it remained consistent and if Marguess was sacked by C4 then i guess it was down to that and, hopefully the new boss will put things in order a bit more and then Hollyoaks really could be the best soap on TV again there is the return of Warren, I think it was a good move to bring him |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,408
|
Yet more reasons for HO to be axed
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23,842
|
Quote:
No Just no! PM era is far better than the LA era
LA main failing was the slowness of her storylines, personally I'd rather watch a storyline that was complete, consistent and believable than basically have to switch my brain off to watch one of PM's episodes, forget everything that you've seen before because chances are he's just going to completely disregard and give the characters daily personality transplants. He promised so much but delivered SO little. Just hope the new EP has a memory longer than a goldfish. |
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 13,401
|
I defintely agree that the show is a millions time better now and i luv the things that Marguess has done but the inconsistency is the worse it has been, just a shame as it is ruining what is otherwise a great show
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,573
|
Quote:
Yet more reasons for HO to be axed
![]() Why click on a Hollyoaks thread if you dont like the show? |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,408
|
Quote:
Your 1000000th post about wanting Hollyoaks axed.
Why click on a Hollyoaks thread if you dont like the show?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 381
|
Quote:
I watch it out of boredom
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,408
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 381
|
Quote:
At least I don't enjoy watching it
![]() ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,408
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 39,633
|
Quote:
Disagree.
LA main failing was the slowness of her storylines, personally I'd rather watch a storyline that was complete, consistent and believable than basically have to switch my brain off to watch one of PM's episodes, forget everything that you've seen before because chances are he's just going to completely disregard and give the characters daily personality transplants. He promised so much but delivered SO little. Just hope the new EP has a memory longer than a goldfish. Her pacing was definitely wrong, but what I really hated was she didn't seem to believe in any of her characters herself - not once did she seem to sit down and ask, what would this character actually do, or feel? Instead she just turned up the music, turned on the slo-mo, and expected us all to 'feel' for them. Big mistake, With PM's characters, they just seem a lot more real - so even the ones I don't specially like (Mitzeee, or Warren) can make me laugh, and they interact really well. And if that's right, you can get over a lot of the other problems with edits and the continuity problems. And hopefully we're done with those now anyway. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,066
|
Hollyoaks is my favourite soap at the moment, but yes I agree it can be inconsistent. As has been already discussed on this forum, the pacing is off, the editing a complete mess and there are too many characters on the show as it is - do we really need Ruby, Ethan, Doug, Lynsay, Jamil and Noah?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,783
|
I can't remeber what was so bad about LA?? I am getting annoyed with the crappy editing and random characters personality transplants. But I guess neither has been bad enough for me to actually switch off. Although I have come very close to it in the last couple of weeks. I want HO to just go back to the good old days
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:18.


I know you're not saying it shouldn't have been done but I think it's better that they got rid of them sharpish (pardon the pun) rather than us having to wait for ages when they knew we didn't want that.

I think a lot of people who criticise the show have forgotten how bad it was when Lucy Allan was producer.