Hollyoaks General Discussion (Part 2) Spoilers Included - Page 377 — Digital Spy
Options

Hollyoaks General Discussion (Part 2) Spoilers Included

1374375377379380395

Comments

  • Options
    BrekkieBrekkie Posts: 24,333
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    As long as he vanishes one way or another - really don't want to see a redemption arc for him.

    Given he never made the titles it's fair to assume he was only intended to be a guest character for a year or so, although Rafe was on an even shorter contract and made it in.
  • Options
    lufcfan1998lufcfan1998 Posts: 18,871
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Brekkie wrote: »
    As long as he vanishes one way or another - really don't want to see a redemption arc for him.

    Given he never made the titles it's fair to assume he was only intended to be a guest character for a year or so, although Rafe was on an even shorter contract and made it in.
    Talking of titles, I wonder when we'll start to see Hannah, Freddie etc appear in them? This week, or once Robbie has made his return?
  • Options
    lufcfan1998lufcfan1998 Posts: 18,871
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    edited 28/04/24 - 18:39 #9404
    1uz8oxymj6as.jpeg
    I’ve seen this photo from an upcoming episode of Hannah with a man on Twitter/X, and I’m wondering if the man in the photo is either Robbie, or a man she meets, seduces, then robs?:

    I’m still glad that she’s back full time!
  • Options
    kat123456kat123456 Posts: 1,510
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Brekkie wrote: »
    As long as he vanishes one way or another - really don't want to see a redemption arc for him.

    Given he never made the titles it's fair to assume he was only intended to be a guest character for a year or so, although Rafe was on an even shorter contract and made it in.

    I assume he always intended to exit at the end of this storyline.
  • Options
    BrekkieBrekkie Posts: 24,333
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    He was basically maternity cover for Jessica Fox.
  • Options
    lufcfan1998lufcfan1998 Posts: 18,871
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Brekkie wrote: »
    He was basically maternity cover for Jessica Fox.

    I agree. I don’t think he was meant to be permanent was he?
  • Options
    SteveHardy1985SteveHardy1985 Posts: 3,667
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Brekkie wrote: »
    He was basically maternity cover for Jessica Fox.

    I agree. I don’t think he was meant to be permanent was he?

    Presumably he's going to be gone with this Lucas plan, right?

    I don't think even Hollyoaks would try redeeming him.
  • Options
    lufcfan1998lufcfan1998 Posts: 18,871
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    edited 29/04/24 - 02:36 #9409
    Just thinking - what did Hannah call herself when she introduced herself to Lucas? Was it Tricia (or Trisha) or Treasure?
  • Options
    lufcfan1998lufcfan1998 Posts: 18,871
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Also, just watching a classic Hollyoaks episode from 2006 - and there was a scene in the SU students bar. Does anyone know when this closed down please? As according to Hollyoaks Wiki, it first opened in March 2004?
  • Options
    lufcfan1998lufcfan1998 Posts: 18,871
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    1uz8oxymj6as.jpeg
    I’ve seen this photo from an upcoming episode of Hannah with a man on Twitter/X, and I’m wondering if the man in the photo is either Robbie, or a man she meets, seduces, then robs?:

    I’m still glad that she’s back full time!

    Turns out the man is Robbie, as there's a full version of the photo on the Hollyoaks Instagram page.
  • Options
    tfox6tfox6 Posts: 2,974
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Brekkie wrote: »
    As long as he vanishes one way or another - really don't want to see a redemption arc for him.

    Given he never made the titles it's fair to assume he was only intended to be a guest character for a year or so, although Rafe was on an even shorter contract and made it in.
    Talking of titles, I wonder when we'll start to see Hannah, Freddie etc appear in them? This week, or once Robbie has made his return?

    I doubt there will be additions until the relaunch in September, just a slow succession of removals.

  • Options
    GoosebeeGoosebee Posts: 5,302
    Forum Member
    tfox6 wrote: »
    Brekkie wrote: »
    As long as he vanishes one way or another - really don't want to see a redemption arc for him.

    Given he never made the titles it's fair to assume he was only intended to be a guest character for a year or so, although Rafe was on an even shorter contract and made it in.
    Talking of titles, I wonder when we'll start to see Hannah, Freddie etc appear in them? This week, or once Robbie has made his return?

    I doubt there will be additions until the relaunch in September, just a slow succession of removals.

    I've stopped even checking now as they are so outdated.

    I agree I doubt any new titles will launch until September.
  • Options
    FrancyFrancy Posts: 10,847
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    And in september the new titles will probably last 10 seconds or be a simple title card... or if they stay as long as they are now, each character will feature 10 times in them in order to fill them up! LOL
  • Options
    JArsea123JArsea123 Posts: 9,565
    Forum Member
    Hope you all had a good weekend Oaksters! So what are your predictions for pride week then guys?
  • Options
    orangeowlorangeowl Posts: 2,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    edited 29/04/24 - 07:50 #9416
    Brekkie wrote: »
    The switch to streaming being spun as a success, though I'm not sure a 40% boost in streaming ratings fully compensates for the 100% loss in C4 ratings, but targetted advertising via streaming can be sold for more than linear advertising. That's reflected in the E4 audience growth in the last couple of months - got no initial boost at all from the crash but it's gone now from all episodes being under 400k to all episodes being over 400k. The question is if it's doing so well why all the cuts - did they act too soon before the changes being made both in production and how the show is broadcast had really filtered through?

    https://www.digitalspy.com/soaps/hollyoaks/a60609341/hollyoaks-ratings-boost-major-changes/

    Interesting point…!
  • Options
    BrekkieBrekkie Posts: 24,333
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Just thinking - what did Hannah call herself when she introduced herself to Lucas? Was it Tricia (or Trisha) or Treasure?
    Treasure.
    Also, just watching a classic Hollyoaks episode from 2006 - and there was a scene in the SU students bar. Does anyone know when this closed down please? As according to Hollyoaks Wiki, it first opened in March 2004?
    I'd say around 2013. Think Annalise/Barney etc. Were the last intake of students in 2011 but despite their brilliance they didn't get a second year.
    tfox6 wrote: »
    Brekkie wrote: »
    As long as he vanishes one way or another - really don't want to see a redemption arc for him.

    Given he never made the titles it's fair to assume he was only intended to be a guest character for a year or so, although Rafe was on an even shorter contract and made it in.
    Talking of titles, I wonder when we'll start to see Hannah, Freddie etc appear in them? This week, or once Robbie has made his return?

    I doubt there will be additions until the relaunch in September, just a slow succession of removals.
    That's what it feels like. It made sense initially after the crash if new titles were on there way but now doesn't if any refresh is put back to when the episodes are cutback, as it's no good launching a new look then having to cut 20 people from them weeks later.

    They might remove Jamelia and reinstate the Grace scene at a bare minimum. I would like to see the others added even if only for three months as not updating the titles really adds to the feeling it's a dying soap.

    It can't be too tricky just to film something around the village with JJ and Frankie, Marie and Abe, Kitty and Freddie, Hannah and Robbie, plus perhaps the triplets.
  • Options
    orangeowlorangeowl Posts: 2,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Brekkie wrote: »
    It seemed like Sharon was meant to be a big deal when they brought her in. Quickly becoming a partner for Warren and friend for Mercedes, but then that all got dropped very quickly. They never even really bothered much with showing family scenes with her, Zoe and Pearl. Just felt like what was the point of her existing.

    As awful as it sounds to have 20 cast members axed. There really were plenty already that were so underused that you could already make up a lot of that number just from them.

    My fear is such decisions had already been made prior to the cuts and the 20 will be on top of them.

    It is worrying if characters like Sharon, Zain, Hunter etc were already planned to leave and not part of the 20 being axed.

    This could now could well include a lot of popular characters, rather than just being a collection of the pointess and underused.

    We know Cindy is part of the 20. I don't think anyone else has been confirmed yet as definitely one of the 20.

    I would like to know the answer to this as well. I’m surprised that Cindy is the only character so far who has come out and said she’s being axed. From what she said in her statement, it sounds like all the actors who are leaving were told at the same time (about five weeks ago).
  • Options
    orangeowlorangeowl Posts: 2,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    billy1808 wrote: »
    Looking at Gregory Finnegans Instagram I see he’s just uploaded some new headshots…

    Noooo! I love James - he’s one of the best characters in the show. Another nail in the coffin 😭
  • Options
    orangeowlorangeowl Posts: 2,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    edited 29/04/24 - 08:17 #9420
    Brekkie wrote: »
    It'll be no more than a coincidence.

    Even Hannah's return I'm not completely enthused about because I worry they'll ruin the legacy of the character, especially with how we know she returns. Yes, we don't necessarily want sweet innocent troubled Hannah to be the same person 15 years later but she can be a no-nonsense soap icon without resorting to prostitution and ripping people off.

    Feel like Freddie and Grace are returning purely to fill the hole to be left by Warren, something neither Warrens' fans or haters want and an area of the show most people want scaling back on. If they really need a female villian keep Norma around - but keep it on the lighter side. This stuff is usually much more watchable when it's just all a little bid dodgy rather than full on criminal, and more about trying to make a quick buck than vengence and murder.

    I don't really see how Norma stays around given the upcoming cull and Warren's exit but like the idea of her deciding to use evil for good - so trying to be a better person but not necessarily going about it in the most ethical manner. Also would be a good time jump twist for us to return a year later and her be married to Jack. I'd imagine they'll be at least one unexpected marriage in that missing year.


    The only positive about this Freddie and Grace story is the idea they'll use the money to emigrate and therefore leave the show, but I think we can all see a mile off that Warren will get to the money first and it'll be used as his exit from the show - enabling him to leave doing something bad but not so bad that he can't return.

    Good post - I agree with pretty much all of this, although do I adore Norma as the Undertaker. I really hope she sticks around but would be surprised if she does, given Warren’s exit.

    I’m almost three weeks behind now and am struggling to find the motivation to catch up.
  • Options
    BrekkieBrekkie Posts: 24,333
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It's worth remembering when redundancies are in the air even ifvyou're not made redundant you probably feel the need to look a bit more yo the future and be prepared for future cuts, so for an actor updating headshots is just like updating a CV. Doesn't mean they're leaving immediately but that they're realistic they need to be ready to do so in the not too distant future.

    I really wouldn't like James to leave but frankly at the moment it feels like he already has. We've not seen him since Ste was in hospital and it's ridiculous how absent the family scenes are from Lucas's current storyline.
  • Options
    OldoaksyOldoaksy Posts: 506
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Brekkie wrote: »
    It's worth remembering when redundancies are in the air even ifvyou're not made redundant you probably feel the need to look a bit more yo the future and be prepared for future cuts, so for an actor updating headshots is just like updating a CV. Doesn't mean they're leaving immediately but that they're realistic they need to be ready to do so in the not too distant future.

    I really wouldn't like James to leave but frankly at the moment it feels like he already has. We've not seen him since Ste was in hospital and it's ridiculous how absent the family scenes are from Lucas's current storyline.

    Agree with this about the headshots, I would assume most people start updating stuff and getting ready for looking for a new job when the current one feels on shaky ground. However I also agree that it already feels like James is being phased out.

    I also found it strange that it’s only confirmed about Cindy leaving…. Until they announced the stunt (which I’m sure they’d said they weren’t going to do for the mass cull???) Now I’m wondering if they’ve told others not to say anything so there can be cliff hangers over who survives the stunt & who doesn’t.
  • Options
    OldoaksyOldoaksy Posts: 506
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It’s also just dawned on me that not only are they rewriting James’ story for Lucas but it feels like they may be rewriting the Myra, Sally, John Paul story with Lizzie & Kitty. I’m not up to date yet but part way through Fridays E4 I’m even more certain that Lizzie & Kitty have some secret child out there somewhere from a past life together
  • Options
    SteveHardy1985SteveHardy1985 Posts: 3,667
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    orangeowl wrote: »
    Brekkie wrote: »
    It seemed like Sharon was meant to be a big deal when they brought her in. Quickly becoming a partner for Warren and friend for Mercedes, but then that all got dropped very quickly. They never even really bothered much with showing family scenes with her, Zoe and Pearl. Just felt like what was the point of her existing.

    As awful as it sounds to have 20 cast members axed. There really were plenty already that were so underused that you could already make up a lot of that number just from them.

    My fear is such decisions had already been made prior to the cuts and the 20 will be on top of them.

    It is worrying if characters like Sharon, Zain, Hunter etc were already planned to leave and not part of the 20 being axed.

    This could now could well include a lot of popular characters, rather than just being a collection of the pointess and underused.

    We know Cindy is part of the 20. I don't think anyone else has been confirmed yet as definitely one of the 20.

    I would like to know the answer to this as well. I’m surprised that Cindy is the only character so far who has come out and said she’s being axed. From what she said in her statement, it sounds like all the actors who are leaving were told at the same time (about five weeks ago).

    Didn't Steph also say that it was her choice to be honest and say she was axed? So many of the other actors that have announced their exits may actually have been axed but they're saying something different in public? I'm not actually sure how many were truly leaving of their own volition or were axed but didn't want to say it.
  • Options
    omnidirectionalomnidirectional Posts: 18,836
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Also, just watching a classic Hollyoaks episode from 2006 - and there was a scene in the SU students bar. Does anyone know when this closed down please? As according to Hollyoaks Wiki, it first opened in March 2004?

    The SU Bar never officially closed, it just disappeared and was replaced by the hospital set in late 2014.
  • Options
    orangeowlorangeowl Posts: 2,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    orangeowl wrote: »
    Brekkie wrote: »
    It seemed like Sharon was meant to be a big deal when they brought her in. Quickly becoming a partner for Warren and friend for Mercedes, but then that all got dropped very quickly. They never even really bothered much with showing family scenes with her, Zoe and Pearl. Just felt like what was the point of her existing.

    As awful as it sounds to have 20 cast members axed. There really were plenty already that were so underused that you could already make up a lot of that number just from them.

    My fear is such decisions had already been made prior to the cuts and the 20 will be on top of them.

    It is worrying if characters like Sharon, Zain, Hunter etc were already planned to leave and not part of the 20 being axed.

    This could now could well include a lot of popular characters, rather than just being a collection of the pointess and underused.

    We know Cindy is part of the 20. I don't think anyone else has been confirmed yet as definitely one of the 20.

    I would like to know the answer to this as well. I’m surprised that Cindy is the only character so far who has come out and said she’s being axed. From what she said in her statement, it sounds like all the actors who are leaving were told at the same time (about five weeks ago).

    Didn't Steph also say that it was her choice to be honest and say she was axed? So many of the other actors that have announced their exits may actually have been axed but they're saying something different in public? I'm not actually sure how many were truly leaving of their own volition or were axed but didn't want to say it.

    Yes, but they were all told the same week according to her statement, which was about five weeks ago. So anyone who announced their departure before that time (like Scott) was probably leaving of their own accord anyway. How many people have announced their departure in the last five weeks?
Sign In or Register to comment.

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

©2024 Hearst UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 30 Panton Street, Leicester Square, London, SW1Y 4AJ. Registered in England. All Rights Reserved.