Why get rid of her in the first place and bring in someone boring like Jane!!! It just doesn't make any sense! Kelly was fun and she added a bit of sexiness to the soap!
janes a good character- added some sense to the soap, but getting rid of kelly has nothing to do with jane.
Kelly was a good character and brooke kinsella is a fab actress, bringing her back would be a good move for the soap.
Why would they bother to bring her back? Don't get me wrong, I loved her, but she had s*d all to do during the last year, the storyliners seemed to completely lose interest in her. Her and Spencer had to be the most unconvincing couple in a soap EVER - he's such a wimbly halfwit, why would be look at him twice.
I don't think she was that great a character.. No major objection to her though. Brooke can certainly act, and EE could always do with more capable actors.. As for her having Spence's baby.... No! It was a horrifying enough thought at the time that Vicky came so close to bringing a mini-spencer into the square.. If he had a sprog, then there's every chance his character would be kept around longer. No thanks..
Originally Posted by juliebaird: “Should have kept her in an got rid of Zoe ”
I thought this. I can see Zoe becoming the local bike! Kelly should come back and beg for Spencer's forgiveness for which he just can'r handle and leaves before having a mental break down. I don't mind Spencer too much, I don't hate him as much as the rest of you do!
Originally Posted by HotCrossBun: “I think they got rid of Kelly because she was holding back the charatcer of Zoe, i.e. as Zoe was the only person she really associated with.”
I would say vice versa; it’s Zoe’s character holding back Kelly's.
In recent months Zoe's character has been resigned to hanging around Dennis like some lost, love struck puppy' - not very enthralling viewing in my eyes *Double Yawn*.