Jump to content

Melrose Place (2009)


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.

47 replies to this topic

#31

Maverick

Maverick

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 12, 2009 @ 12:40 AM

So who has which apartment inhabited by the original cast? I think Jonah and Riley have Michael and Jane's place and Auggie has Jo's. Presumably Sydney had Amanda's.

Edited by Maverick, Sep 12, 2009 @ 12:41 AM.


#32

JBC344

JBC344

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 12, 2009 @ 4:35 AM

Maverick, I think that you are right, but its also hard to tell the layout anymore because it seems like a more condensed set, even though all the apartments are about twice the size of the original. The original Melrose set seems bigger in terms of the distance of the apartments from the pool.

For some reason it looks like the pool in this version is a little smaller and the distance from the pool to the apartments is shorter.

#33

jackiecarr

jackiecarr

    Stalker

Posted Sep 13, 2009 @ 6:12 PM

Also, Jake's son could have been a link to new 90210 if they wanted to do a crossover. He'd be about the same age as Naomi's older sister. Not that they still couldn't do a crossover, but it would be a nice callback if Kelly finds out that he's dating one of the high school girls.

#34

Bastille

Bastille

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 18, 2009 @ 2:44 AM

I wonder how familiar the creative team on MP 2.0 is with MP 1.0. I was giving them credit for little things like naming the med student turning to prostitution "Lauren" (I thought, a callback to the madam played by Kristian Alfonso in S2, who was obviously inspired by the Heidi Fleiss story all over the news in 1993-94). But when I saw the Daphne Zuniga interview in which she said the producers had to ask her such questions as "What did your character do for a living?" and "Who did you date on the show?" I worried a little.

Edited by Bastille, Sep 18, 2009 @ 2:45 AM.


#35

Knots Landing

Knots Landing

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 19, 2009 @ 5:48 AM

The one thing that let me know these new writers don't understand the show is when I learned why Heather Locklear turned them down. Originally, Amanda was supposed to die in Sydney's place. If they think that's going to entice people to watch, they're wrong. And I'm sorry, but Amanda and Sydney may have been bitches, but they were likable and not nearly as hard as Sydney (or Amanda would've been) has been portrayed. She had humor and spunk.

#36

MuShu

MuShu

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 19, 2009 @ 8:31 AM

I dislike how the apartments are so dark and cavernous with refrigerators from the '50's, sooooo hipster. One of the things I liked about the original was the apartment set, which looked real with normal sized apartments. I don't care for the overall dark and surreal tone. Let the characters carry the story, not the sets. You have to be Argento to get by with that.



Why are they making Laura Leighton look so old? She can't be much older than forty, but the lighting makes her look haggish and twenty years older. Also, why kill off Sydney so soon? I don't like her role in flashbacks. Reminds me of the dead woman voicing over "Desperate Housewives".

I just caught up with season one of the original. Other than the horrid high waisted pants and Allison's fugly shoes, I was surprised how fresh it still looked.

I vote for the original, but the new show is watchable if you don't think of it as MP. It's far soapier, too with plastic characters. The original cast felt like people you actually knew (to a degree), and the apartment set tied everything together. The new show is disjointed in comparison.

The only thing I see as similiar is that both MP's take place in a economic downtime. There is a pool, too.

C+.

#37

nibehlung

nibehlung

    Video Archivist

Posted Sep 20, 2009 @ 5:01 AM

And I'm sorry, but Amanda and Sydney may have been bitches, but they were likable and not nearly as hard as Sydney (or Amanda would've been) has been portrayed.


I have to disagree with 'likable'. Amanda is the kind of person that I wish I'd never have the misfortune to know in RL. Her personality was just vile, cold and condescending (although they did tone down her abrasiveness in later season). I mean sure, she was fun to watch as a character but also I cringe at the idea of knowing someone like her. So, definitely not 'likable' in that sense.

In comparison, Ella is a far more pleasant character. She can be competitive/catty but she's actually quite nice when it comes to her friends. Of course it remains to be seen if she's going to stay this way or would change into complete bitch. But that would require a complete re-tooling of the character considering at the moment she seems quite warm, free-spirited and relaxed in comparison to Amanda.

Sydney was okay but kinda pathetic back then (she's always way over her head when blackmailing someone else). I think Sydney just mellows out a bit in this version but she's still similar. She's still blackmailing someone but it always backfires on her.

#38

SiameseCatLady

SiameseCatLady

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 20, 2009 @ 1:33 PM

Sydney was okay but kinda pathetic back then (she's always way over her head when blackmailing someone else). I think Sydney just mellows out a bit in this version but she's still similar. She's still blackmailing someone but it always backfires on her.

That's why I loved Syd. She'd go through all this elaborate planning and work to get something or someone and then it would blow up in her face. Even her first supposed death, she was supposedly getting to marry the man of her dreams who was really into her then boom! she's hit by a car on her wedding day.

#39

Erik B

Erik B

    Fanatic

  • Location:MO

Posted Sep 20, 2009 @ 7:21 PM

If they think that's going to entice people to watch, they're wrong.

Although I do like this new show, I do agree that their reasoning for wanting to kill Amanda (and eventually Sydney) was stupid. They wanted to prove this wasn't "your parents' Melrose Place" and show that anything could happen? Fine, but you don't need to kill off good characters to accomplish that. Right now they have blown huge opportunities to have Syd become involved in the new prostitution SL or have her compare Jonah and Riley to Billy and Alison or even S1 Jane and Michael. Having someone attempt to murder Sydney with her surviving would have been more acceptable than killing her off again. I can't blame Heather Locklear for rejecting that plot at all.

#40

JBC344

JBC344

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 22, 2009 @ 5:34 PM

Its just been confirmed by E online. Heather is coming back to Melrose.

#41

Titus

Titus

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 22, 2009 @ 11:06 PM

So who has which apartment inhabited by the original cast? I think Jonah and Riley have Michael and Jane's place and Auggie has Jo's. Presumably Sydney had Amanda's.


Auggie lives in apt. #1, which seems on be on the lower level by the stairs. Jo lived on the upper level.

At any rate, the whole complex seems to have been extensively re-modeled (thanks Kimberly!) so it's hard to judge.

#42

salluste

salluste

    Channel Surfer

Posted Sep 23, 2009 @ 6:15 PM

Just finished the 1x03 (Grand) but will be speculate about 1.0, so I’ll post here. I hope this is the right place, sorry for my English.

I enjoyed this episode a little bit more again. I’m sure I could become addicted in a few more episodes. I’m a huge fan of the 1.0 version, so I’m glad when some characters from the past are present. The new cast is interesting but I hope that old cast will be still around.

And this episode is really important for the story. Seeing the name of Billy, Jake, Jane, Jo, Alison and Amanda is funny and hopeful. I feel like writers are not so “innocent” about what they wrote. I made a jump in 1997 by magic of DVD: Sydney’s dress seems perfectly the same, the car that hit her is almost the same, and Michael has bandages around his hands. It’s a detail maybe but at the end of season 5, from where this “Grand” flashback would come, Michael fought with Peter. His hand injuries were bigger than in “Grand”, we couldn’t see his fingers, right. But still, the fact that they put him bandages although this is not important and will probably never be explained in 2.0 makes me feel comfortable. They surely watched the original show (some parts at least).

So, this story of someone from Syd’s past threatening her to kill her new husband Craig can’t be bullshit. Maybe they took the idea of producers in 1997. I read somewhere that they were thinking they could convince Laura Leighton to return later in the sixth season. We didn’t see her dead and we were going to learn later that she had been kidnapped by Rikki and Martin Abbott, guru from the cult Sydney joined during season 3. It was quite a good idea because it was a big and great Syd’s storyline, and the best Melrose years (in term of audience too). That ended by Sydney escaped the cult and Rikki phoning Sydney and saying on his answering machine that they will return “for you”. That was in late February 1995. Traci Lords (ex-porn star) played Rikki and it started a little buzz around the world.

Although she seems really happy at her wedding with Craig, maybe she had long been threatened by the Abbott. Since a few days or since February 1995 (the escape) until May 1997 (the wedding). And she got used to it… I’m trying!;-)

I would adore to talk about past of every single 1.0 characters… But I have a life!
I still hope Syd’s second death is a fake, whatever it takes. I agree that having someone attempt to murder Sydney with her surviving would have been more acceptable than killing her off again.

PS : Too much music and to much pop rock hits in this remake for me. Really. They made that awful choice increasingly during season 7 too. Music is not everywhere and not only pop rock. Even for teenagers and Los Angeles.

#43

tommie

tommie

    Couch Potato

Posted Sep 23, 2009 @ 11:38 PM

Sydney’s dress seems perfectly the same, the car that hit her is almost the same, and Michael has bandages around his hands.


I honestly missed that. Well done, writers!

Now correct the spelling of Alison - she never spelled with the "l"s.

#44

AmberJamie

AmberJamie

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 28, 2009 @ 12:31 PM

Even though they seem to putting the crazy on this show with Violet, I feel that there is less of a chance for major catfights. I am not sure if this is good or bad yet.

#45

Case

Case

    Loyal Viewer

  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Montgomery,Alabama
  • Interests:Anthropology. Singing. Movies. Hot guys. Practicing Killer Sarcasm. Hating Brenda Hampton and Kate Bosworth.

Posted Sep 29, 2009 @ 1:00 AM

I am not sure if this is good or bad yet.


Finally getting to see the pre-Amanda MP1.0 episodes. Until she and Jo showed up I couldn't remember why I loved the show.

Catfights. Lobotomies. Murder. Attempted Murder. Demonic Hippies. Blackmail. Faked amnesia. EXPLOSIONS.
That's what made MP great.


Until we get that,I'd say bad. Oh so bad.

Edited by Case, Sep 29, 2009 @ 1:01 AM.


#46

twotrey

twotrey

    Fanatic

Posted Oct 9, 2009 @ 3:20 AM

Jane's return was good (and I like she was bitch Jane instead of doormat Jane), but it was disappointing she didn't interact with Michael or that we saw a flashback of her finding out Syd was alive. I do think things are finally picking up a bit, and I hope they do go into more detail on those files Michael had on the old residents. Am I misremembering the original series, or wasn't there some sort of invention that Michael and Peter (or Coop?) were trying to get a patent on? Trying to figure out if Lauren's mention of an invention (hey, a rhyme) was a callback or not.

As far as Syd saying the people who ran her over were people from her past... I'm just chalking that up to her being mistaken and not knowing it was someone as completely random as Samantha's father. It would make total Syd-sense for the whole ordeal she ended up going through off-camera these years to be started by a mistaken assumption.

Of course, so far, not in the league of the original show's prime. I wish they'd make one of the original characters a true regular (read: resident) instead of just a guest star. Who knew I'd ever say this but... more Jane, please!

Edited by twotrey, Oct 9, 2009 @ 4:10 AM.


#47

tommie

tommie

    Couch Potato

Posted Oct 9, 2009 @ 4:22 AM

Am I misremembering the original series, or wasn't there some sort of invention that Michael and Peter (or Coop?) were trying to get a patent on? Trying to figure out if Lauren's mention of an invention (hey, a rhyme) was a callback or not.


Yes - the Mancini Glove. I wondered if that was a callback too or not; the plot was beyond dire anyway so it doesn't matter.

#48

herefornow

herefornow

    Video Archivist

Posted Apr 16, 2012 @ 4:42 PM

Was rewatching this on Netflix. I wish they would've done a season 2. Mid way through the season it got pretty good with Ella' and Jonah and David and Lauren.