• Network: The CW
  • Series Premiere Date: Sep 8, 2009
Metascore
55

Mixed or average reviews - based on 24 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 24
  2. Negative: 4 out of 24

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Critic Reviews

  1. Reviewed by: Verne Gay
    100
    This one is stylish, smartly produced and has a very appealing cast.
  2. 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.
  3. The new Melrose Place may not be the old, but it is, all told, instantly engaging and--from the evidence--likely to remain so.
  4. Executive producers Todd Slavkin and Darren Swimmer ("Smallville") tie the show's tangle of plots and relationships together with an agile skill that makes this new Melrose Place more appealing than the show's concept suggests should be possible.
  5. 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.
  6. 75
    With murder, prostitution, blackmail and hot lesbians in just the first episode, it won't be long before that iconic swimming pool boils over. Innocence lost is always fun to watch, especially when it's this good-looking.
  7. 75
    Terrific fun, and much classier than the old show, but still with plenty of cheese.
  8. 70
    So I "like" the new Melrose Place, in that I think it has the potential to be as addictive, and phony, as a can of Pringles potato crisps.
User Score
5.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 28 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 28
  2. Negative: 9 out of 28
  1. 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 AmandaIt 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. Full Review »
  2. 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 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. Full Review »
  3. CristinaG
    Oct 5, 2009
    8
    I've watched three episodes so far and find it entertaining.