Does the show need an injection of life, if so, then what?

[Revealed]

Are the cast aside from the old timers and David supposed to be twenty somethings?

I'd assume Abigail is the youngest and guessing she's supposed to be university age. I don't recall the relative age difference between the Fowler siblings ever being mentioned but in the UK at least there's no way Levi would have got to his position as a doctors if he was still in his 20's. The actor who plays Cash turns 40 in a couple of years time but I don't know whether the character is supposed to be much younger. I don't know the ages of everyone but it does seem most of them are over 30 in real life.

[pembie]

David no way in his 20s  that’s so random if true I would say 40s he had alot of history with his wife before coming to the bay 

[Revealed]

Hence I said aside from the old timers and David. The actor who plays him is about to turn 53.

[pembie]

Oh right I misread what you put 

[adam436]

11 hours ago, Revealed said:

Are the cast aside from the old timers and David supposed to be twenty somethings?

I'd add Leah, Justin and Amelia to the list as well, though I wasn't sure if you were referring to age or longevitiy by "old timers". 

I'd say everyone is in their twenties or early thirties. Some would be coming up to mid-thirities going by the age of the actors, but some may be playing slightly younger characters. If the show wants to continue the idea of the show being about that demographic, then any new character introduced should really be introduced in their early/mid twenties to avoid an aging cast (if that makes sense!?). 

The show has moved away from teens/fostering, presumably because they think the audience has shifted. So if many of the younger cast stay "forever", which we've been seeing with Tane, Mackenzie and Justin, then are we to assume that the audience will age with them? This would make sense, as the producers have a reluctance to let go characters who have well and truly run their course (looking at you Tane and Remi!), and if it is the case, could it mean that we eventually see the fostering/family element return in 5 years time with couples like Eden and Cash and Mackenzie and Levi leading the way? 

Or do the producers think that their core audience is the twenties/early thirties demographic and therefore will have the keep up with that by drip-feeding new characters in their twenties, which is what we pretty much saw with the teenage characters for the first 25+ years. 

Edited September 6 by adam436

[Homeandawayfan.]

Amazing to think Leah at 47 is the same age now as what Pippa and Ailsa were in about 1997/1998. Marilyn is 57/58 so is about the same age Floss was in 1988. Scary to think that now.

 

[Dag Dog]

14 hours ago, adam436 said:

I'd add Leah, Justin and Amelia to the list as well, though I wasn't sure if you were referring to age or longevitiy by "old timers". 

I'd say everyone is in their twenties or early thirties. Some would be coming up to mid-thirities going by the age of the actors, but some may be playing slightly younger characters. If the show wants to continue the idea of the show being about that demographic, then any new character introduced should really be introduced in their early/mid twenties to avoid an aging cast (if that makes sense!?). 

The show has moved away from teens/fostering, presumably because they think the audience has shifted. So if many of the younger cast stay "forever", which we've been seeing with Tane, Mackenzie and Justin, then are we to assume that the audience will age with them? This would make sense, as the producers have a reluctance to let go characters who have well and truly run their course (looking at you Tane and Remi!), and if it is the case, could it mean that we eventually see the fostering/family element return in 5 years time with couples like Eden and Cash and Mackenzie and Levi leading the way? 

Or do the producers think that their core audience is the twenties/early thirties demographic and therefore will have the keep up with that by drip-feeding new characters in their twenties, which is what we pretty much saw with the teenage characters for the first 25+ years. 

With 8 of the current Australian pace cast (19) being over the age of 40, and 6 of the remaining 11 being early-mid 30s, its the oldest the cast has ever been... And it shows...

[adam436]

It makes it difficult to keep the show fresh when you have so many characters competing for the same storylines (if that makes sense!).

As opposed to the first 20 years when there was a greater balance of order and middle-aged characters, those in their 20s and teenagers. We had a better spread of storylines. That's harder to maintain with a large cast of primiarly over 30.

[Revealed]

Wasn't sure Amelia was sticking around and Leah and Justin were part of my old timers definition.

I also find it amazing to think how old Leah has become and then I remember how old I am. When the show first began only Fisher, Floss and Neville were older than I am now and Amelia the youngest of the 8 40+ characters would also be the 4th oldest by 1988 standards.

My research on cast members ages tells me only Abigail, Lacey and Jo are under 30 and that Jo turns 30 in a few months time. Not sure how accurate these sources are though because they also said the actor who played Ari was only 29 when he joined which I don't believe for one minute.

When the show first started even the actress who played Pippa was under 30 just about as were roughly half the cast.

In the UK the audience are getting older, none of the youngsters even know what Home & Away is. In the early years it was very much a young persons show if anything because it was new and fresh, the older generations were more into Coronation St which started in 1960. I can only see the audience getting older in the future.

The problem with the spread of ages in the past was characters not having others in their age group to hang around with. What stands out to me was when Shane and Angel finished school and their fellow teens had gone they were hanging around with Michael and Pippa. The way Shane suddenly went from getting up to mischief with Damien to being best mates with Damien's foster dad seemed very odd.

[adam436]

4 hours ago, Revealed said:

When the show first started even the actress who played Pippa was under 30 just about as were roughly half the cast.

I suspect the character was meant to be much older though.

Tom was 40 when the series began, and I suspect Pippa was meant to be about 5 years younger based on when Tom's recollection of how he and Pippa got together.

Carol Willisee was originally cast as Pippa and supposedly started filmed the pilot, and she was about 10 years older than Vanessa and much closer in age to Roger Oakley.

 

4 hours ago, Revealed said:

The problem with the spread of ages in the past was characters not having others in their age group to hang around with. What stands out to me was when Shane and Angel finished school and their fellow teens had gone they were hanging around with Michael and Pippa. The way Shane suddenly went from getting up to mischief with Damien to being best mates with Damien's foster dad seemed very odd.

That was odd, though Angel still did share quite a few times with the likes of Travis, Steven, Kelly and Marilyn from time to time. 

I can't say I noticed it too much with other "generations" though, since we rarely had school leavers stay in isolation too much. There were characters that started hanging out with slightly older characters- like Gypsy living with Sally and Shauna, but never suddenly becoming BFFs with characters twice their age.

I guess the other problem with different age groups is characters' friendships often feel forced because they are segregated into groups, whereas with a cast primarily the same age, many friendships do feel more natural. For example, Pippa #2 and Michael and Alf and Ailsa were BFFs, perhaps lumbered together as the "seniors", but I don't feel the chemistry was there between Alf and Michael and Pippa and Ailsa as it is between some of the younger friendships now.