|
||||||||
Hollyoaks - Are the McQueens the most successful family the show has had? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
|
Hollyoaks - Are the McQueens the most successful family the show has had?
I think they have been, does anyone agree?
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,783
|
They are pretty good, although I did love the Hunters and the Osbournes are still going strong!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 432
|
the mqueens ARE hollyoaks they have been the centre for years without them the show would have even less viewers
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,707
|
no they are just the most overused.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,066
|
I think the reason for their popularity is that they've been at the centre of the show for their years, they are recognized by people who don't watch Hollyoaks and the show has been lucky that Clare Cooper, Gemma Merna, Nicole Barber Lane and Jennifer Metcalfe have stuck around for as long as they did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 812
|
Quote:
I think the reason for their popularity is that they've been at the centre of the show for their years, they are recognized by people who don't watch Hollyoaks and the show has been lucky that Clare Cooper, Gemma Merna, Nicole Barber Lane and Jennifer Metcalfe have stuck around for as long as they did.
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 2,563
|
Nope, that would be the Hunters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lincolnshire, UK
Posts: 3,825
|
Quote:
Nope, that would be the Hunters.
The McQueens however, are such a diverse family and more controversial than any of their contempories. 5 daughters of varying morals, a kind hearted but little bit silly son and a long lost vengeful son, a ditsy niece, a selfish nephew and a mum who is as 'up for it' as any of her daughters. Not to mention a self centred sister - Kathleen. They could have their own show. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,688
|
Quote:
no they are just the most overused.
Hollyoaks has had many great families over the years, the McQueens are no better than many who went before them. Perhaps I'd be more affection to the McQueens if they were not akin to the Dingles with long lost members popping up all over the place. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,034
|
Quote:
The Hunters like the Ashworths and the Costellos, Osbournes and the Valentines have all had good SLs.
![]() Lets not forget the Taylor/Burton clan Liz was amazing, or "Betty" as Frankie used to call her
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: England.
Posts: 3,762
|
No family were better than one of the shows original families - The Cunninghams. I loved Mr C, Angela, Max, Jude, Cindy and Dawn (and in 1997 onwards when they became the Cunningham/Richardson family - Mr C, Helen, Max, Cindy, OB, Mandy, Lewis and Tom.)
The Mcqueens are great though. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,688
|
Quote:
No family were better than the shows original family - The Cunninghams. I loved Mr C, Angela, Max, Jude, Cindy and Dawn (and in 1997 onwards when they became the Cunningham/Richardson family - Mr C, Helen, Max, Cindy, OB, Mandy, Lewis and Tom.)
The Mcqueens are great though. I have to admit that the Cunninghams were much better than the Benson's (I hated Lucy) and of course they've had a much longer lasting legacy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: England.
Posts: 3,762
|
Quote:
I've always considered the Benson's to be the original family! Funny how we all remember things differently.
I have to admit that the Cunninghams were much better than the Benson's (I hated Lucy) and of course they've had a much longer lasting legacy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,707
|
Quote:
I'd go with this and as another OP has said the show has just been lucky that so many members of the family have stuck around for so long.
Hollyoaks has had many great families over the years, the McQueens are no better than many who went before them. Perhaps I'd be more affection to the McQueens if they were not akin to the Dingles with long lost members popping up all over the place. The Osbornes, the Bensons, the Cunninghams they were/are all great families and families with better morals and more likeabilty than the McQueens. They are families that don't resort to the lowest that they can to get what they want obviously with the odd exception Jack's fake death. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kandy Kitchen
Posts: 37,694
|
I just find the McQueens tiresome and reptitive tbh
Myra and Mercedes in particular should have been axed years ago. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 393
|
Yes! The McQueen's are brilliant! And have been part of so many amazing storyline...
- Niall's revenge! - Jacqui's rape! - Carmel's tanning accident! - John Paul's sexuality! - Calvin's murder! - Etc. And yeah the Osborne's are good too, but Jack/Frankie haven't had a storyline in how long :yawn: |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,688
|
Hollyoaks' nature as a teen soap makes it very difficult for anyone to be declared the best, greatest or most successful anything, purely because there's so few viewers who have been there from the beginning and/or have watched religiously for several years.
I'm generalising (not directing this at OP, or any contributors to this thread) but how can you say the McQueens are the greatest every family, when you've never even seen the Cunninghams, Hunters etc. (Although count yourself lucky you never had to endure the Morgans). |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,707
|
Quote:
Hollyoaks' nature as a teen soap makes it very difficult for anyone to be declared the best, greatest or most successful anything, purely because there's so few viewers who have been there from the beginning and/or have watched religiously for several years.
I'm generalising (not directing this at OP, or any contributors to this thread) but how can you say the McQueens are the greatest every family, when you've never even seen the Cunninghams, Hunters etc. (Although count yourself lucky you never had to endure the Morgans). |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: In The Land of Original WilS
Posts: 1,170
|
Lord there are so many HO families as well as The Mcqueens. Starting off with The Bensons who I really liked especially Kurt and Ollie. The Andersens were good and could have been great if Natasha had stuck around but when she died then it was more or less done for her family. The Osbornes were a great induction and had the link of being family to The Andersens. The Boltons we didn't get to see enough of before they were on there way. The Cunninghams are a legendary HO family starting off with Dawn. Shame most of them had to died!! The Richardsons were a very interesting family especially the way it turned out for Lewis. The Hudsons and The Patricks were good but came and went. The Morgans were a great family unit and had a lot of great SLs mostly for the kids. The Nashes were another one not in long enough for me. The Hunters for me another legendary HO family. The Davies were good. The Hutchinsons would have been better if they had had more of them. The Deans (without The Osbornes) were brilliant even before McDean. As much I loved Frankie and Johnno together breaking them up and putting her with Jack was fantastic.The Taylors were fine but were more interesting when they go together with The Burtons although The Burtons would have been fine without The Taylors.The Owens were a good family even though I kind of hated what became of Sam cos I preferred him to Russ. I'm sorry for those that did not like them but I definitely liked The Valentines. Wasn't too sorry to see Sonny go though! And then we have the amazing family that is The Mcqueens. Have had more of the most interesting characters within a familiy. However I feel that the show relies on them far too much at the expense of any other family, like for instance The Deans/Osbornes. The Haytons came and only one left standing.The Ashworths are another brilliant family, even Rhys who isn't one of my favs by any stretch of the imagination.The Barnes were great but have all gone now
The Fishers were a great addition. The Roys were are good enough family but they lost it for me when the best character from that family left - Ash.The Carpenters and The Ramsays were fine but only one of them from each family was popular so they kind of ended. The Longfords were a bit hit and miss.The Costellos worked really well however The Sharpes didn't at all although I liked Taylor.The O'Connors were fine but they let go of the father too soon without it making any sense and now we don't really see Finn. The Bradys, love them. The Savages are fine but nothing really special to be honest. And finally The Kanes could become memorable if they are in it long enough.So my favourites are 1) The Deans/Osbournes 2) The Mcqueens 3) The Hunters 4) The Bensons 5)The Valentines ![]() 6) The Cunninghams 7) The Morgans 8) The Ashworths 9) The Barnes 10)=The Costellos/The Bradys
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,574
|
I think the McQueens are a very successful family but I do find a lot of them grate on me at time (Carmel,Michaela,Mercedes). My favourites were the Hunters and the Ashworths
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Sunny Scotland
Posts: 840
|
I liked the Cunnighams/Richardsons, Hunters, Deans, Obsornes and the McQueens. I agree with the people saying that the Bensons were HO's original family, however, I don't remember a lot of them as I was very young at the time they were a part of Hollyoaks.
If I had to pick a definite favourite, it would be the Hunters. I loved Lisa's self-harming storyline, as well as the Ellie and Toby saga. Dan's death was beyond sad, too. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Magherafelt, Co. Derry
Posts: 20,508
|
I would say it's the Cunningham/Richardsons and the Osborne/Deans
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 22
|
Quote:
The Valentines were dreadful!
![]() Lets not forget the Taylor/Burton clan Liz was amazing, or "Betty" as Frankie used to call her ![]()
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:18.




Liz was amazing, or "Betty" as Frankie used to call her
The Fishers were a great addition. The Roys were are good enough family but they lost it for me when the best character from that family left - Ash.The Carpenters and The Ramsays were fine but only one of them from each family was popular so they kind of ended. The Longfords were a bit hit and miss.The Costellos worked really well however The Sharpes didn't at all although I liked Taylor.The O'Connors were fine but they let go of the father too soon without it making any sense and now we don't really see Finn. The Bradys, love them. The Savages are fine but nothing really special to be honest. And finally The Kanes could become memorable if they are in it long enough.