Members Leia Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 That's how I remember feeling the first time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catsmeouch Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 But that's not how she was at the end of the original series. Even Heather Locklear agrees the new writers aren't writing Amanda properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cheyenne Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 Thank you!!!! Finally someone who watched the show and remember how it was. I disagree. But even if she was different now. Why is it so unbelievable after everything she's been through that she acts this way? People change you know, I know I've changed in the last ten years, so why shouldn't Amanda? Plus it's not like she all sudden became this nice girl. From what it appears she's evil and that's not hard to believe at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bellcurve Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 This show should have committed more to making Sydney the HBIC. I don't think the ratings would have been much better, but they would have been consistent. And Laura Leighton was more able to pull off devious, scheming, crazy sexpot than Heather Locklear has during the entire run of this show. The CW's audience doesn't want to be sold on cheesy one liners...they want to be sold on sex. Sydney would have given the bitchastic sex appeal the role needed. As much as I love Heather Locklear, I can't and wouldn't ever tune in to see her character destroyed. I kind of see what catsmeouch means in terms of the destruction of the Amanda character. The Amanda I grew to love and watched over the years would never stoop as low as to be an accomplice to art theft. Neither for money, nor kicks. Amanda is extremely shady and manipulative, but that is a major step beneath her. She doesn't have time for childish sh*t like helping Sydney(her ENEMY) steal art. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 I have a really hard time believing that Todd Slavkin & Darren Swimmer were fans of the original show. It is really just a schizo notion... If they really were, or if they understood what this show was about, I can't imagine how it all went wrong from the start. Co-sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cheap21 Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 I did love Amanda's line to Ella about her not having the curves to pull off a prison jump suit...lol I really wish they would explain what happened to Jane's child with Michael. Since we havent seen him or her, Im assuming she miscarried. Still want some clarification. In my world, she had the baby and its off with Kyle right now Have thye ever explained why Amanda isnt in jail, what happened to Peter and why she isnt on the run anymore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catsmeouch Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 Nope, never. If Syd went to jail for faking her death, Amanda should've too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cheap21 Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 Im not talking about faking her death, Im talking about killing her old boyfriend. Thats why she went on the run; to escape prosecution. I woneder what happened to those murder charges Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catsmeouch Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 That's fine, but she should also be in jail for faking her death. If Syd went to jail for it, Amanda should go to jail for the same crime. Unless you think the death-faking laws should be different for Amanda? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DaytimeFan Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 It's just...sad. I loved MP. I don't hate nuMP. But it just ain't the same. I think the problem is that the original was the zeitgeist show...it is a 90s time capsule, it epitomizes Bill Clinton's presidency much like Dynasty epitomizes the Reagan era...it was such a white hot show that anything else was doomed to fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cheap21 Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 no I dont think they are different but murder is an more serious crime and she was actually charged with that. We dont know if she was ever charged with faking her death Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catsmeouch Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 But she must have been because she's very publicly alive and well. It wouldn't have been hard for the authorities to find her when she returned to the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cheap21 Posted April 2, 2010 Members Share Posted April 2, 2010 again we dont know that. Considering Peter is nowhere to be seen, he could have very well taken the fall for her. If he's dead, she could say he kidnapped her. If he's alive, he could be in jail, claiming that in order to spare her, bc its nto like someone hasnt gone to prison to protect her before. I think faking her death, while a crime, is pretty minor in comparison to murder, and I wish that one would be explained away bc it was vital to her exit when the show ended Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jonathan Posted April 3, 2010 Members Share Posted April 3, 2010 This was a much better episode than the last few. It struck me that Dr. Michael Mancini is a renowned cardiologist just like Dr. David Hayward! And they're both evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Huntress Posted April 7, 2010 Members Share Posted April 7, 2010 Ratings-wise, this so-called "revamp" has failed big time. Since the show returned from its hiatus in March, only 1 million people have tuned in every week. I really hope that next week's season finale will be the series finale. The original "Melrose Place" was about a group of people that were the same age. Back then Amanda, Michael and the others were a part of the group. Mixing up the older generation and the newbies is not what this show is supposed to be about. Right now they only have 5 (!) series regulars. In my opinion they should have introduced at least 3 new residents after Auggie and Violet had left and make things more interesting. Btw, I can't stand that Drew character, he doesn't seem to fit in with the other residents. He doesn't look Melrose-ish enough for my taste. The only character I still like is Riley because she seems like a real person to me. Ella is still too cartoonish with Katie Cassidy overacting in almost every scene. David is a bland copy of Jake Hanson (both owned the group's hangout and have a son they didn't know about - wow, what a coincidence!), and Jonah is simply annoying. Lauren could have an been interesting character if they had given her a different storyline. That prostitute story was badly written and led to nothing with her anticlimactic confession in the courtyard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.