|
Post by anthonyl on Dec 1, 2014 10:32:39 GMT -5
The Amy who refused to let Ste see the kids when he was A) with Brendan and later B) on drugs would never willingly have an abusive man around them. It goes against everything we know about this character. I'm not surprised Hollyoaks would do this. And the last we heard, Amy was staying with her dad. What happened? Will they even explain anything beyond just presenting the situation on screen and expecting us to believe it?
|
|
|
Post by Zathras on Dec 1, 2014 20:51:07 GMT -5
WTF? Just when I think Hollyoaks can't sink any lower with their story development ... this happens. I guess I'll see how far I'm willing to watch it. Maybe I'll tune out for 6 months again, like I did this year after JP was raped. This show desperately needs new showrunners.
|
|
trini
Junior Member
living and loving life
Posts: 514
|
Post by trini on Dec 1, 2014 23:59:02 GMT -5
I'm taking a wait and see approach with this spoiler. It was just a month ago Amy wasn't allowing Ste to see the kids because of his drug habit.
This would be dumb by Hollyoaks standards. The only reason they could be doing this is to find a stupid reason for Any and the kids to return to Hollyoaks permanently or they are setting up something tragic involving Amy.
|
|
cheerios
Full Member
If we could decide who we loved, it would be much simpler, but less magical.
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by cheerios on Dec 2, 2014 4:05:28 GMT -5
Wait I'm confused about Terry with Amy and the kids. Didn't Amy and her dad see Terry beating the living daylights out of Ste. Why in the world would Amy let her children or herself anywhere near that man?
|
|
|
Post by Difficult Diva on Dec 2, 2014 4:35:46 GMT -5
Wait I'm confused about Terry with Amy and the kids. Didn't Amy and her dad see Terry beating the living daylights out of Ste. Why in the world would Amy let her children or herself anywhere near that man? Nothing "confusing" about this ridiculously sad situation they have written for Amy's return to the village this time. The show has given Amy convenient amnesia in regards to her letting her and Ste's children around his abusive stepfather. Amy, who went from the last few years of her time on this soap, pleading for Ste to get away from his abusive lover, who actually threatened her and the kids, to the point that her friendship and trust in Ste regarding his life choices have caused her to keep their children away from him for the past two years (remember, the only time she was okay with the children being with Ste was when he was with Doug), is now fine with having the children around another abusive man that beat Ste for years of his childhood. It's just sad and ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by Difficult Diva on Dec 2, 2014 4:48:44 GMT -5
I'm taking a wait and see approach with this spoiler. It was just a month ago Amy wasn't allowing Ste to see the kids because of his drug habit. This would be dumb by Hollyoaks standards. The only reason they could be doing this is to find a stupid reason for Amy and the kids to return to Hollyoaks permanently or they are setting up something tragic involving Amy.I hate to even think about it, but I'm betting that it does end with something tragic involving Amy and that Ste would end up having permanent custody of the children. There has been no spoiler about Amy officially returning. It wouldn't be "Will & Grace" for Ste, Sinead and JP. It would be "The McHay Bunch" with those two married, a pregnant Sinead and raising all their kids together (Matthew, Leah and Lucas). Until Leah's biological father comes back again to try and take her away from Ste. He had issues with Ste being gay and getting a civil marriage with Doug. How would he cope with Amy being dead, Ste officially married to another man AND his diagnosis of being HIV positive?
|
|
cheerios
Full Member
If we could decide who we loved, it would be much simpler, but less magical.
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by cheerios on Dec 2, 2014 13:35:09 GMT -5
I'm taking a wait and see approach with this spoiler. It was just a month ago Amy wasn't allowing Ste to see the kids because of his drug habit. This would be dumb by Hollyoaks standards. The only reason they could be doing this is to find a stupid reason for Amy and the kids to return to Hollyoaks permanently or they are setting up something tragic involving Amy.I hate to even think about it, but I'm betting that it does end with something tragic involving Amy and that Ste would end up having permanent custody of the children. There has been no spoiler about Amy officially returning. It wouldn't be "Will & Grace" for Ste, Sinead and JP. It would be "The McHay Bunch" with those two married, a pregnant Sinead and raising all their kids together (Matthew, Leah and Lucas). Until Leah's biological father comes back again to try and take her away from Ste. He had issues with Ste being gay and getting a civil marriage with Doug. How would he cope with Amy being dead, Ste officially married to another man AND his diagnosis of being HIV positive? Isn't the actor who played Leah's bio dad now on Emmerdale as Ross Barton? I guess they could recast it and have him come back. Well if Amy dies, and if Ste dies from drugs or being HIV positive, wouldn't the kids become like Tom. Moving from home to home as his carers keep dying off and he gets sent to a new home. Who would get custody? Sinead or JP?
|
|
|
Post by Difficult Diva on Dec 9, 2014 6:07:54 GMT -5
I hate to even think about it, but I'm betting that it does end with something tragic involving Amy and that Ste would end up having permanent custody of the children. There has been no spoiler about Amy officially returning. It wouldn't be "Will & Grace" for Ste, Sinead and JP. It would be "The McHay Bunch" with those two married, a pregnant Sinead and raising all their kids together (Matthew, Leah and Lucas). Until Leah's biological father comes back again to try and take her away from Ste. He had issues with Ste being gay and getting a civil marriage with Doug. How would he cope with Amy being dead, Ste officially married to another man AND his diagnosis of being HIV positive? Isn't the actor who played Leah's bio dad now on Emmerdale as Ross Barton? I guess they could recast it and have him come back. Well if Amy dies, and if Ste dies from drugs or being HIV positive, wouldn't the kids become like Tom. Moving from home to home as his carers keep dying off and he gets sent to a new home. Who would get custody? Sinead or JP? Maybe JP and Lockie?! Ste will never be killed off the show. Now Ste's puzzled by why Amy would "ever" let their kids around a violent man like his stepfather, when she knows how dangerous he is to those around him. Damn - If this were ANY other soap, they would have Ste recognizing the situation from his own mistakes regarding his choice in letting his kids also around Brendan AND Seamus way back when.
|
|
cheerios
Full Member
If we could decide who we loved, it would be much simpler, but less magical.
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by cheerios on Dec 9, 2014 6:12:41 GMT -5
Ugh I love Ste, but he's getting so frustrating. And so is Amy, she's so against Ste and Brendan. But letting Terry anywhere near the kids when she knows what he has done.
|
|
|
Post by Difficult Diva on Dec 16, 2014 22:27:18 GMT -5
Oh James.
I hope that Kirkwood and the writers handle the HIV storyline with more gravitas than they have with the gay domestic violence saga (It wasn't epic, unique or different.), the male rape storyline (The victim of rape being jailed.), the bipolar storyline (Is Cindy back in the hospital?), the lack of diagnosing Sienna's huge mental problems (She's still kidnapping people AND wants to marry her biological twin brother.) and their ongoing straight domestic violence storyline (Interesting that there are no fans demanding that Maxine stay with Patrick, fans pleading to see Patrick as the "ultimate victim" or fans saying that this is "epic, unique and different".)
Yet, it's not like the British soap press will ever say anything remotely critical about the above.
|
|
|
Post by Zathras on Dec 16, 2014 23:53:04 GMT -5
Great, so I suppose they'll learn about Sinead carrying Ste's baby at the wedding (or reception). They can't have one flipping day without shit happening? Sigh. So predictable, but still frustrating.
|
|
|
Post by Difficult Diva on Dec 17, 2014 5:48:55 GMT -5
Great, so I suppose they'll learn about Sinead carrying Ste's baby at the wedding (or reception). They can't have one flipping day without shit happening? Sigh. So predictable, but still frustrating. I wonder if it'll be Sinead who reveals the truth or Tony after the Ste/JP wedding? Actually, is Sinead even at the wedding? I didn't see (or recognize) her in any of the photos.
|
|
trini
Junior Member
living and loving life
Posts: 514
|
Post by trini on Jan 7, 2015 19:49:09 GMT -5
Ste and John Paul- HIV Story line begins
January 19th, 2015 Ste is concerned when he gets an unexpected call.
January 20th, 2015 Ste has heartbreaking news for John Paul....
January 21st, 2015 John Paul needs answers, but Ste's behaviour pushes him further away. While they wait for important news, will they find the strength to face the future together, or is this a betrayal too far?...
January 22nd, 2015 John Paul struggles to come to terms with the latest bombshell.
January 23rd, 2015 Can Ste and John Paul save their marriage?
(DIGIGUIDE)
|
|
trini
Junior Member
living and loving life
Posts: 514
|
Post by trini on Jan 30, 2015 20:26:33 GMT -5
There are rumours that hollyoaks may have scrapped the storyline between John Paul and Tony son but based of the spoilers on digiguide it seems that it is a go. Although I'm not sure they have sex.
Edit: I don't know if the storyline line if there is one have been scrapped but I've been hearing about this storyline since November it was circulating before Ste's HIV storyline was announced and even then there was questions about it being scrapped,and yet the two actors involved where seen flinging a kiss scenes in December, I think Hollyoaks PR is trying to sell a controversy.
Also, I wouldn't be surprised if nothing happens but most of the tensions come from the fact that John Paul will be his teacher after there encounter.
|
|
trini
Junior Member
living and loving life
Posts: 514
|
Post by trini on Jan 30, 2015 20:51:25 GMT -5
Spoilers for John Paul and Ste Monday, February 09Ste confides in a friend that he's HIV positive. Wednesday, February 11John Paul's good mood is ruined by a haunting phone call. Thursday, February 12John Paul asks for Trevor's help in getting rid of his demons, while Ste and Sinead go for a baby scan. Friday, February 13John Paul is forced to choose between Ste and his career Monday,February 16thJohn Paul and Ste's marriage is under strain, and John Paul turns elsewhere for comfort. (Harry ?) Tuesday,February 17thA reminder of the past makes things worse for John Paul. Wednesday, February 18th,As John Paul attempts to overcome his demons, Patrick's intervention could spell big changes to John Paul's future. Thursday, February 19thTony invites Ste and John Paul over for tea, but a surprise could land John Paul in hot water. (credit digiguide/soap overdose/waveguide) Note that these spoilers are at C4 pace.
|
|
talula
Full Member
Posts: 2,001
|
Post by talula on Jan 30, 2015 20:58:58 GMT -5
There are rumours that hollyoaks may have scrapped the storyline between John Paul and Tony son but based of the spoilers on digiguide it seems that it is a go. Although I'm not sure they have sex. will post spoilers later. doesn't Harry is too young to have an affair with John Paul? he suppose to be teenager by now, yuk!
|
|
trini
Junior Member
living and loving life
Posts: 514
|
Post by trini on Jan 30, 2015 21:01:04 GMT -5
There are rumours that hollyoaks may have scrapped the storyline between John Paul and Tony son but based of the spoilers on digiguide it seems that it is a go. Although I'm not sure they have sex. will post spoilers later. doesn't Harry is too young to have an affair with John Paul? he suppose to be teenager by now, yuk! He's 15 or 16. 16 is the age of consent in the UK except where it involve teacher / student relationship it is illegal.
|
|
talula
Full Member
Posts: 2,001
|
Post by talula on Jan 30, 2015 21:04:23 GMT -5
doesn't Harry is too young to have an affair with John Paul? he suppose to be teenager by now, yuk! He's 15 or 16. 16 is the age of consent in the UK except where it involve teacher / student relationship it is illegal.thanks,in this case it will be illegal anyway for JP, why JP can't find comfort with Lockie?
|
|
trini
Junior Member
living and loving life
Posts: 514
|
Post by trini on Jan 30, 2015 21:16:19 GMT -5
If JP and Harry have sex before he gets back his teaching job it wouldn't be illegal,(that is if Harry is 16)However, if they have sex on JP return to teaching then it becomes illegal.
JP having an affair Lockie is starting to look good about now .
|
|
|
Post by anthonyl on Jan 31, 2015 1:39:45 GMT -5
I thought it was just a kiss (no sex) between Harry and JP and then JP later finds out he's Tony's son AND a teenager in one of his classes.
|
|
trini
Junior Member
living and loving life
Posts: 514
|
Post by trini on Jan 31, 2015 7:14:03 GMT -5
I thought it was just a kiss (no sex) between Harry and JP and then JP later finds out he's Tony's son AND a teenager in one of his classes. yep, it I heard the same thing but rumour is that it was meant to lead to more, but the show may have scrapped that part.
|
|
carld2
Full Member
Posts: 2,104
|
Post by carld2 on Jan 31, 2015 18:02:32 GMT -5
What a terrible storyline, one that just makes a complete mockery of any last shred of characterization John Paul had, and one that is a tired retread of the Tony/Theresa shite from Kirkwood's first tenure.
He of all people should have known how important it was for John Paul to have some gasp of integrity. He created the character in the first place.
It's pathetic. He just wants to obliterate the show.
|
|
|
Post by anthonyl on Jan 31, 2015 20:11:44 GMT -5
What about before this, when he hires Trevor to kill Finn? I mean, it's hard to imagine JP doing such a thing. Besides, Finn is in JAIL. It's not like he's going to get out to terrorize anybody. And where is JP getting the money for this hit? He and Ste can't afford their own place but he's got money to hire hitmen? Lord, this show.
|
|
carld2
Full Member
Posts: 2,104
|
Post by carld2 on Jan 31, 2015 21:01:07 GMT -5
That's also idiotic - I can almost headcanon it in that John Paul is surrounded by criminals who get away with whatever they do, so he's tempted to do the same. But this with Harry just makes no sense to me. Even "John Paul randomly takes drugs" made more sense.
|
|
|
Post by francescavl on Feb 1, 2015 5:48:09 GMT -5
JP wanting to have Finn murdered, and the news about Harry are the stroke that broke the camel's back for me. I'm out. I won't be watching this shit anymore.... I can't do anything to prevent this moron from completely character assassinating my favourite character (and one of the few decent people left on HO)...but I won't be there to watch him do it.
|
|