te.

Don't worry, we'll see Victoria in flashbacks (as confirmed by miss Stowe herself).

Kaboom!

I always meant to watch Roswell but never did, although I've heard people insist Katherine Heigl ruined the show anyway.

I don't recall Heigl being disliked on Roswell, to be honest.

It's been so long since I've seen it so I barely remember her role in it.

Actually, Amy, it was the other way around. Stacy went undercover as Sammy Jo -- that is, when she wasn't undercover as a fashion model, porn star, prostitute or exotic dancer (...which seemed to happen all in the same episode sometimes...).

Not to mention when Stacy went undercover as a landlord/ad executive (who never worked)..

Pilar wasn't horrible as such, just an obvious "replacement character".

See: Jennifer on Melrose Place, Gina on Beverly Hills 90210 etc.

I think Katherine, Maxwell Caulfield, and PodFallon were the biggest mistakes, although the biggest issue may have just been bad timing, since these were stories people had tired of on Dynasty. It's still amazing that Stephanie Beacham was cast and was so phenomenal right out of the gate.

I actually think the writing for Fallon was the biggest mistake - watch season 9 of Dynasty where they finally start writing Fallon like Fallon and Emma shines. I'm not sure if it's Katherine's acting itself that was worse or if it was a question of (yet again) writing and directing. I think they tried far too hard to make her the Krystle of the show and you just ended up symphatising with Sable instead.

And Maxwell Caulfield was very talented in certain ways.

Either Juliet Mills is a very lucky woman or the biggest fag hag ever.

The show has been uploaded here: http://www.dailymotion.com/playlists/user/flamingoroadtv/1

Fox trims Glee:

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/07/10/fox-trims-final-season-of-glee-to-thirteen-episodes/281545/

Are we sure? this reminds me of what happened with Brandon Buddy when he announced his exit from OLTL and later retracted saying he was hacked

Could be. They've already said they're "discussing" the episode order, they could very well be having "discussions" with cast members too (ie, how do we make this as cheap as possible).

I speculated in the Hieroglyph thread what sort of cuts the Fox execs would do next now that Kevin Reilly's gone and cutting down Glee seems like the logical next step...

Oh, the Body in the Pool plot was a bad idea from the start. I can see why they wanted some sort of over-arching umbrella story, but at the same time it really wasn't needed.

How about the show would've just started with Ella's character moving into the building? Lauren, who is explained having financial difficulties with funding her studies, is looking for a roommate. Ella then starts at WPK - if Heather didn't want to do the pilot, they always could've had her stomp in a few episodes later just like they ended up doing. Meanwhile we're introduced to the other characters - David, who might or might not be Jake's son (can be implied, but not outright said) and a drifter. The "perfect" couple Riley and Jonah. Violet, an eternal screw-up who works as a waitress at the bar where chef (or rather, bartender?) Auggie works. Then we could be introduced to Lauren's work place at Wilshire, where the chief of staff is (still) none other than Michael Mancini. Etc etc.

I've not even done it that differently other than removing the silly murder plot or silly retconned children.

The problem with MP2.0 were obvious - the writers never watched the original show and instead of trying to fit their script around who was ready to come back, they tried to wrangle in the ones who were willing to come back into their own idea what the show should be.

If they had to do the whole "Body in the Pool" storyline, why not try to lure Jamie Luner to do it? She was the last one who owned the complex and it's not inconcievable that she would still be there, perhaps embittered. With the characters previous pill popping addiction that role fits her more than Amanda (who I could never see as a drunk) or Sydney (who, let's face it, was an eternal screw-up and her owning the complex / being an art thief was just odd). It also wouldn't have pissed off fans of the original show that much while giving it a throwback and for new viewers it wouldn't matter as it would've just been the landlord lady in the pool anyway.

Or the whole issue with changing David from Jake to Michael's son. Michael, along with characters like Amanda, were probably the easiest to write into the show without having them looking sad and old still living in the apartment complex as they would just be at their work place. If they had to give Michael and David some relation, why not have Michael being his step-dad after marrying Colleen (Jake's ex)? That would've given Brooke Burns' character similar motives for offing who ever was in the pool ("you slept with my husband and son!") while not trying to force something that wasn't in the original show.

I still would've liked a second season of it though, if only for Katie Cassidy and Heather Locklear going head-to-head.

I don't think Courtney is the greatest actress, but she's so damn charming.

I would've been interested to see season six if Aaron could've swayed Courtney to stay. They could've had her and Amanda start their own company.

Courtney has always been one of the actresses that talked positively about her run on the show. Unlike a lot of the actors and actresses she never seemed to trash it. Her love for drunken Alison is funny too - I recall an interview with Andrew Shue a few years ago - he had a very romantic vision of Alison and Billy getting together some time after the show. Courtney just thought Alison would be a big old drunk at this point.

Also, David on Melrose 2.0 was supposed to be Jake's son. Stupid, but they switched the roles when Grant Show didn't want to appear on the show.

Jake should've left with Jo. They made a horrible mistake not just reuniting those two, and I was a huge fan of theirs. IIRC, Daphne almost did Season 5 and then something happened at the last moment - I can't recall what.

From everything I've gathered Daphne had been unhappy with Jo's storylines for a long time when she left. You could tell by her phoning in her performance during season 4.

Jo being in season 5 is an interesting thought, though. I've never heard of Daphne being interested in signing in for another season.

I agree with what was said about the show not preparing for the mass exodus after Season 5. Coop did nothing for me except he was responsible for Lexi coming to town. I could never understand Megan's attraction to him and found the two boring.

It always struck me as odd how much the writers struggled to find characters that worked - in theory, Melrose Place should've been the easiest show on television to write in new characters as they could just move into the building - the fact that there even were empty apartments in the building struck me as odd. Not only that, they could've had new characters coming into the show via Whilshire Memorial, D&D or Shooters, much like Kimberly and Amanda were originally introduced. But either they had to have contrived backstories or they just ended up lasting a few episodes for a plot never to be seen again.

I still say that Doug Savant's idea of Matt being in love with Michael is the greatest storyline that never happened.

If Melrose happened today you just know Michael would've been a sleazy bisexual manwhore.

Kimberly suffered the same fate like most characters in season 4 - she was zoned into a group of characters (Sydney, Michael, Amanda, Peter). Not even when she moved into the building for two seconds they seemed to try and get her out of said rut.

Yeah the Pricilla Presley as a psycho nurse came across as a lame attempt to top the previous season's cliffhanger and it was too gimmicky even for MP.

Then again how can you get crazier than blowing up the entire building anyway?

On the other hand, the bombing was sort of motivated, even if it was a stretch that Kimberly suddenly knew how to make bombs. She basically had beefs with most of the building, bar Jake, Alison and Billy.

In season 4 she suddenly became sane, re-married Michael and then went insane again. In all honesty I probably would've written out Kimberly for season 4 and then had her return sometime in season 5. I honestly think she would've worked better as sort of a recurring villain the way Sheila has been on Bold and the Beautiful for some time now.

With Brooke, besides her being completely co-dependent on Billy, I think it was a mistake making her poor so early. Amanda's a character that had funds, but she never really did anything substansial storylinewise with it bar buying the building. It would've been fascinating to see her as the rich bitch villain with endless funds to screw up the characters lives.

The sad thing about season 4 is that the writers had SO much material to play with if they wanted to, but they never fulfilled that potential.

I know some people compare the bombing of the building to Dynasty's Moldavian Massacre, but I really don't think it had to dip in soapy goodness after that. Alison walking around in Hayley's mansion could've been played on more definitively.

Brooke was good in season 3, but they completely ruined her character in season 4.

And yeah, her being islanded even after she and Billy broke up was weird. It's like they didn't try and just made her move in with Alison.

Have people talked about the unlikelyness of Brooke's death?

I mean she spent the season screaming "BILLEEE! BILLE?" and everyone cheered when she finally got killed off but her flying across the pool was a little silly?

What do you think?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITxiZqw2cjk

"Nobody's home. Nobody cares!"

BILLEEEEEE!

See, this is why I believe networks are too eager sometimes to give "hot" shows multiple-year renewals. Just because "Glee" was in better shape (both in the ratings and in the overall quality) two years ago, that was no guarantee that things were going to stay that way.

What networks are doing multiple-year renewals?

The worst thing I've heard is that they've contracted the players for a few more years (which can be broken). I've never heard of a network literally getting stuck with a such low-rated like Glee.

No it wouldn't. If nobody's watching the show, nobody's going to be buying the songs either. If FOX was happy with it's ratings, it would of been on the fall schedule and air all 22 episodes originally ordered for it's final seson. Instead, it's not on schedule and FOX wants to reduce the number of episodes, so they can end Glee as quickly as possible.

Exactly. Fox actually rated lower than the CW last night. If they had been happy with the profits they wouldn't just be in discussions for a shorter order for season six, but they wouldn't be thinking about it as the final season. They would just replace Murphy if he wouldn't do a seventh season.

It wouldn't surprise me if they did a summer burn-off, to be honest.

Series dives to dramatic ratings low for Season 5 finale. How is this show still renewed?

http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/05/14/glee-finale-low-cws/

They renewed it for two more seasons last season, so they're basically stuck with it. They're "in talks" with Ryan Murphy how many episodes season 6 should be, considering they were originally contracted with 24 episodes... They're essentially begging to have a short final season. It'd be funny if they refused and they were stuck with a full season order, just for shits and giggles.

But Aiden was hot, so it's alright by me.