Melrose Place

:

Season 1
User Score
5.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 28 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 28
  2. Mixed: 6 out of 28
  3. Negative: 9 out of 28
Watch Now

Where To Watch

Stream On
Buy on

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

view
per page
  1. MartinS.
    Sep 20, 2009
    1
    This show was cheesy in it's original form. Why bring it back now? As long as there is an audience for this kind of crap studios will keep delivering it.
  2. CristinaG
    Oct 5, 2009
    8
    I've watched three episodes so far and find it entertaining.
  3. MasJ
    Sep 10, 2009
    3
    As a fan of the original show, the debut episode of this remake seemed hollow.
  4. ByronT
    Sep 12, 2009
    9
    The premiere was pretty awesome thanks to them giving us an instant dash of drama. Definitely looking forward to watching it every week and buying it on DVD.
  5. JamieG
    Sep 16, 2009
    6
    It was good except from the really bad acting by ashley simpson wentz!!!! Shes is down right awful!!!
  6. MorganG
    Sep 20, 2009
    8
    This show is pretty good, I love Ella Simms, she's the new Amanda. The characters are very interesting and very intriguing. Finally a good show for the CW.
  7. ShayS
    Sep 24, 2009
    3
    I tried to watch the first 8 minutes of the show... i got the reaction that girl got after watching the tape of that dead girl from The Ring.
  8. XiuyiW.
    Sep 24, 2009
    1
    Okay show. made much worse by ashlee simpson's crap acting. argh. u positively get nightmares from seeing her making gooey eyes at her crush in the show. Why ever is she billed as the main actress if she hardly appears on the show. Looking pretty she can do. Act, she cant do.
  9. DanielR
    Sep 16, 2009
    10
    Love it! The second episode jump started the series again. Can't wait to see Jane ..and bring back bitchy Amanda!!!
  10. Kadeemluvmusic
    Sep 29, 2012
    3
    For me, the whole Melrose Place reboot idea is not working because The CW is used to be known for shows like Smallville and Gossip Girl, but I certainly don't watch the network no more. With Aaron Spelling gone, there's no telling where a huge cult classic will reboot. But the new "Melrose Place" has a lot of bad acting, bland storylines, a terrible excuse for a perfect '90s geek magnet. IFor me, the whole Melrose Place reboot idea is not working because The CW is used to be known for shows like Smallville and Gossip Girl, but I certainly don't watch the network no more. With Aaron Spelling gone, there's no telling where a huge cult classic will reboot. But the new "Melrose Place" has a lot of bad acting, bland storylines, a terrible excuse for a perfect '90s geek magnet. I mean, "Melrose Place" was the epidemy of FOX on Monday nights. After ending 7 seasons, I might've watched all of the episodes on DVD. It was the "90210" of all time. I don't think the CW will be long as a company, but I want the old WB and UPN back.… Expand
  11. pureshores
    Mar 25, 2016
    6
    It had two good things going for it: the name of the show, and the return of some of the original's great characters, most notably Amanda Woodward. What went wrong? Everything, really. I just learned the show-runners used to be with Smallville and they were looking to target the same demographic - it's on CW so that's a no-brainer. The problem with that though, the show comes right afterIt had two good things going for it: the name of the show, and the return of some of the original's great characters, most notably Amanda Woodward. What went wrong? Everything, really. I just learned the show-runners used to be with Smallville and they were looking to target the same demographic - it's on CW so that's a no-brainer. The problem with that though, the show comes right after the reboot of 90210 which pretty much was all about the same thing. If that wasn't bad enough, their targeted audience was also out partying instead of staying in to watch the show. The writing wasn't bad per se, but it really took a while for things to build up. The casting also didn't help. Props for the diversity, but some of the acting were really bad. At best, it was an okay effort. You're really just sticking to see which of the original casts they were able to convince to come on. Although that match-up between Ella and Amanda at the finale showed promise, it was sad the ratings failed to convince the powers-that-be to give it another chance.… Expand

Awards & Rankings

76
#76 Best TV Season of 2009
77
#77 Most Discussed TV Season of 2009
64
#64 Most Shared TV Season of 2009

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
55

Mixed or average reviews - based on 24 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 24
  2. Mixed: 12 out of 24
  3. Negative: 4 out of 24
  1. Entertainment Weekly
    Reviewed by: Ken Tucker
    75
    It remains to be seen whether the new Melrose will become as giddily addictive as its predecessor--but it's off to a promisingly dizzy start.
    Read full review
  2. The Hollywood Reporter
    Reviewed by: Randee Dawn
    80
    A canny revamp, well-lit and visually eye-popping in a shadowy-neon way that hints at the old with several familiar faces while showcasing newcomers including redheaded Ashlee Simpson-Wentz.
    Read full review
  3. Slate
    Reviewed by: Troy Patterson
    30
    It seems a statement of the obvious to call the new Melrose trash, but a reviewer must observe certain formalities--and at least it is trash we can dig into and learn something from,
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »