Jump to content

Developing: 90210 Reboot with Original Cast!


Chris B

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 289
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

I love you, Ian, but nobody's gonna watch this show. I haven't turned the channel yet simply because the remote control is on the other side of the room.

This is too silly and indulgent. I want to say it could've been a one-off special, but not even that. This is the type of thing that should begin and end as a quick, fun 10-minute online clip.

Edited by All My Shadows
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Its been out there since March that BH 90210 was a show within a show concept where actors play fictional versions of themselves and FOX has been showcasing that in all interviews and Previews. Some fans just like to Bitch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I kind of enjoyed it but I still agree this is such a waste of a great opportunity. Like @Chris B said shows like Big Little Lies are huge right now, people like seeing adult, sharp written soaps this could have been an easy win for everyone. They could have done all the things they're attempting to do here with an actual reboot. Tackle aging in Beverly Hills, bad finances, mid life crisis, death of friends, etc and people would have ate it the hell up. CBS just has never understood how to properly utilize this franchise. I expect the show will have this one season and be done.

 

I want Heather Locklear to get herself together and for Darren Star and the peak Melrose Place cast to give us the 90s reboot we deserve because I know they'd all actually be down to do it the right way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I absolutely believe that most of the cast wouldn’t have been interested in a true sequel series at all. If otherwise has been stated, then I am wrong, but they’ve always been like that group of popular kids from high school who are all still friends but don’t really dwell on high school memories because they’re living their lives in the present. This gives them that chance to work together without going “back” down the same road.

 

i love them, and I get it, and I feel bad that ppl are directly calling out “whomever had this idea” because we know it was Tori and Jennie, but it’s foolish to think everyone would want to see them all together and NOT playing their characters.

 

Didn’t Tori and Jennie have a sitcom a few years back that was a quick one and done? They even played former costars. Once again, “let’s work together without focusing on the old stuff.”

 

It’s so easy to make new stuff out of the old stuff!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • In my usual account on my most used video hosting site with the video title  DAYS 1-8-15 Will & Paul Sex This is an edit I began when I was first teaching myself to edit & at that time I couldn't make it do what I wanted it to do. I pulled it up & finished it this morning. 
    • Or Megan is shot as retaliation for Dave's unpaid gambling debts...while Julie confesses she's the biological mother of Special Guest Star Barry Bostwick's little boy.
    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy