[Mr Moriarty]

I don't think it is an overstatement to say she looks WAY older than her years, - hell, she looks older than Ruby , someone actually her own age (the actress that plays ruby I believe is similar age to the new holly actress?), she is the worst possible casting for a 14 year old - they clearly just wanted to hire someone on their looks for the role, but didn't fancy the moral quandry of getting in actual jailbait - MUCH better and more moral that it is a legal teen we are all meant to be gawking at - does anyone else think it is all a bit weird - clearly hiring on looks for someone that is meant to be two years from the legal cusp of adulthood? I personally find it very creepy casting on oaks part.

Oh and I am not passing judgement on her acting skills - not really had much of a chance for that yet have we - so far she seems functional, who knows though she could turn out to be the show's biggest bane , or asset in the long run

[EEforest]

I'm willing to overlook the obvious age issue but so far I quite like Holly. Typical Cindy's daughter

[Mr Moriarty]

Originally Posted by EEforest

I'm willing to overlook the obvious age issue but so far I quite like Holly. Typical Cindy's daughter

Fair enough, she seems rather similar, but dont you think its a truly awful piece of casting - hollyoaks have always casted on looks, lets face it, but this is the first time I have found them doing so actively creepy and weird.

[EEforest]

Originally Posted by Mr Moriarty

Fair enough, she seems rather similar, but dont you think its a truly awful piece of casting - hollyoaks have always casted on looks, lets face it, but this is the first time I have found them doing so actively creepy and weird.

Yeah I completely agree, it's all rather bizarre, I've seen some people say its sexualising children but I don't agree with that- its just dodgy casting.

[Mr Moriarty]

Originally Posted by EEforest

Yeah I completely agree, it's all rather bizarre, I've seen some people say its sexualising children but I don't agree with that- its just dodgy casting.

Im all for hot teens personally, trust me, Im actually a relatively moderate pervert, I am sure I have at some point (unknowingly, i aint that bad) checked out a 14 year old chick, but I find something weird about a show known for its sexualisation of later teens casting someone on looks for someone in their early teens - it's one step too weird even for a show as sexualised as Hollyoaks.

[omnidirectional]

It's been said (but not confirmed) that the actress (Wallis Day) was originally cast to play Maddie's sister. When Bryan Kirkwood returned Maddie was axed but Wallis was already contracted and had to be offered a new roll.

When she first joined Hollyoaks her agent's website said she had been cast as "Poppy".

[Mr Moriarty]

Originally Posted by omnidirectional

It's been said (but not confirmed) that the actress (Wallis Day) was originally cast to play Maddie's sister. When Bryan Kirkwood returned Maddie was axed but Wallis was already contracted and had to be offered a new roll.

AH! not quite as creepy as I thought then - still though, dont care why it happened, as cute as she is, she looks older than even her own age in my opinion, looks about 20 i'd say - least authentic teen ever - puts american teen soaps to shame lol

[dreamycreamy]

Originally Posted by omnidirectional

It's been said (but not confirmed) that the actress (Wallis Day) was originally cast to play Maddie's sister. When Bryan Kirkwood returned Maddie was axed but Wallis was already contracted and had to be offered a new roll.

When she first joined Hollyoaks her agent's website said she had been cast as "Poppy".

This makes SO much more sense, because this casting is even weird for HO standards but that explains it. I still don't get why though, that they turned her into Holly? They could have made her into a new character or something but I guess Holly was easy as there is already a background, history, etc on her. Still think its highly strange though, imagine her and Tom hanging out...

[Mr Moriarty]

Originally Posted by dreamycreamy

This makes SO much more sense, because this casting is even weird for HO standards but that explains it. I still don't get why though, that they turned her into Holly? They could have made her into a new character or something but I guess Holly was easy as there is already a background, history, etc on her. Still think its highly strange though, imagine her and Tom hanging out...

Girls are a bit more physically developed than boys at that age anyway though, arent they? ut even considering that, next to Tom, she IS admittedly going to look weird, but I guess, the above could explain it, or at least make it not THAT creepy...

[MrWoodySir]

Holly is not I repeat not going to help Cindy's character, in fact I can see Holly not getting many scenes with Cindy.... it's just an arrival to try and makes us boys think she's hot.

The actress is very weak too.

[Mr Moriarty]

Originally Posted by MrWoodySir

Holly is not I repeat not going to help Cindy's character, in fact I can see Holly not getting many scenes with Cindy.... it's just an arrival to try and makes us boys think she's hot.

The actress is very weak too.

Thats what I find slightly creepy about it 0- the actress is 18, but the character is only meant to be 14 - she was clearly casted on her looks, which is TOO weird - im not gonna be pc and say there ain't nice looking 14 year old chicks out there, but the fact that a mainstream tv show is so clearly going for sex appeal with a chatracter that is meant to be in her younger teens is freaky - one of the first times I have ever been genuinely a little put off by oaks desire to sexualise their cast.

[MrWoodySir]

Originally Posted by Mr Moriarty

Thats what I find slightly creepy about it 0- the actress is 18, but the character is only meant to be 14 - she was clearly casted on her looks, which is TOO weird - im not gonna be pc and say there ain't nice looking 14 year old chicks out there, but the fact that a mainstream tv show is so clearly going for sex appeal with a chatracter that is meant to be in her younger teens is freaky - one of the first times I have ever been genuinely a little put off by oaks desire to sexualise their cast.

Agree, I find myself slightly embarrassed when I see her and thinks she's a very good looking young woman.

I've got another worry for the character, who exactly is she going to interact with? like I've already posted I don't think her and Cindy will get much screen time together. The person closest to her age is Tom, but lets be honest it would be a bit weird seeing them talking to each other on a regular basis and been best friends.

[Mr Moriarty]

Originally Posted by MrWoodySir

Agree, I find myself slightly embarrassed when I see her and thinks she's a very good looking young woman.

I've got another worry for the character, who exactly is she going to interact with? like I've already posted I don't think her and Cindy will get much screen time together. The person closest to her age is Tom, but lets be honest it would be a bit weird seeing them talking to each other on a regular basis and been best friends.

Im the sort of guy that checks out (though not in an extended perverted way, im actually pretty respectful) a girl then worriedly thinks what age she might be - not that I am naive enough to think teenage girls cant be attractive, they CAN, its the sole reason for hollyoaks success really - but I do find myself permanently with that feeling with NewLookHolly - like vaguely gulty, even though the actress is perfectly legal - THIS SHOW IS NOT MAKING IT EASY TO BE A PERVERT, GODDAMMIT

[MrWoodySir]

Originally Posted by Mr Moriarty

Im the sort of guy that checks out (though not in an extended perverted way, im actually pretty respectful) a girl then worriedly thinks what age she might be - not that I am naive enough to think teenage girls cant be attractive, they CAN, its the sole reason for hollyoaks success really - but I do find myself permanently with that feeling with NewLookHolly - like vaguely gulty, even though the actress is perfectly legal - THIS SHOW IS NOT MAKING IT EASY TO BE A PERVERT, GODDAMMIT

, last line made me laugh.

[Mr Moriarty]

Originally Posted by MrWoodySir

, last line made me laugh.

I know, usually the show focuses on later teens and early twentysomethings, when dishing out their sexualisation. But I AM NOT used to moral quandries with this show - usually its very much a black and white show, even during its consistently fumbled attempts to prove otherwise.

Say Hollyoaks was a mate of mine, and its blatantt sexualisaion of this 14 year old character was my mate checking out a clearly young chick in such a blatant, prolonged manner- this is what I would say to him (hollyoaks) :

"Not cool man. NOT. COOL"


I get the feeling though that the show will show her in the usual array of revealing outfits as the actress is legal though, and if confronted the excuse will be well that's how teenage girls dress these days, if they even bother to give one - it may just be me thats a little genuinely creeped out by such prolonged (assuming they keep the character on) blatant attempt.

[priscilla]

I don't like her, they've made her bitchy and annoying they've re-invented Maddie in the form if Holly. She looks about 24 not 14 and rather than cast on acting ability they've casted on looks again.

[Keren-Happuch]

I agree that Holly looks too old to be 14, she looks at least 20. But then I thought Maddie was a ridiculous piece of casting as well - she was supposed to have gone out with Bart but Bart looks about 12 and Maddie looked about 25. She looked way older than the other sixth formers and was very obviously not 17 or whatever age she was supposed to be.

I think the girl who plays Lacey would have been good as Holly. She looks quite young and I think she looks a bit like Cindy.

[Mr Moriarty]

Originally Posted by priscilla

I don't like her, they've made her bitchy and annoying they've re-invented Maddie in the form if Holly. She looks about 24 not 14 and rather than cast on acting ability they've casted on looks again.

Its freaky allright - casting on looks is par for the course with oaks but, well Ive said it all before, but its just odd this time, just very odd