![[a case of the blog]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-SY-CjpYjN_U/VF0vl6CNPjI/AAAAAAAAEOo/kQO_lGphFIs/s1600/newblogheader19.gif)
So the CW had some premieres this past week, including a returning guilty pleasure -- 90210 -- the return of an old guilty pleasure -- a revamped Melrose Place -- and the debut of a potentially exciting new series -- Vampire Diaries. I watched all three, and for the most part, I was pleasantly surprised. I wasn't COMPLETELY sold on this "new" new 90210, as I felt the routine with Silver, Naomi, and Adrianna being super duper close best friends seemed entirely too forced. Silver and Naomi are the two personalities they've done the best job of establishing -- and I think it's a stretch that they'd be so chummy. Speaking of Silver, she looks absolutely SMOKING. Love the new, shorter hair. The dark turn with Annie has the potential to be fun, although it's a bit reminiscent of her Degrassi days. Oh, and that new character, Teddy, looks like he's about 45 years old.
I thought Melrose Place gave an impressive showing. They did a far better job than 90210 of integrating the classic characters with the new ones, and I feel like the murder mystery is a fun, suspenseful, and focused way of driving the season. They've done a nice job of placing suspicions on numerous characters, whether it's through motive, opportunity, or suspicious behavior. And honestly, how freakin' awesome is it having Michael Mancini back on our televisions? The show's only real downfall is that it's named "Melrose Place" and it's on the CW. If everything was the same, but under a different name and on ABC, people would be lauding it as the second coming of Desperate Housewives.
Vampire Diaries was a lot of fun, and most certainly worth a second viewing. If you remember from my Top Ten Cases: Hottest women on television list, I'm a big fan of Nina Dobrev. And I've always been a vampire enthusiast -- even before it was fashionable. So I had to give this show a shot. Some of the similarities to True Blood were a bit striking -- the protagonist is an orphan with a deadbeat brother, there's a girl with seemingly supernatural abilities (who has a "gram," no less), the warring vampires over the affections of one human female, and so on. But that's nit picking, and ultimately irrelevant. In the end, I really just enjoyed the characters as well as the overall conflict of the series -- especially between the two brothers. This season of True Blood really gained momentum when it focused on the Bill/Sookie/Eric triangle, and this show is doing that right off the bat. I most certainly recommend this series to anybody who's a fan of the HBO hit show.
Anyway, WWE's new Pay-Per-View, Breaking Point, is on tonight. And while I admire the company for these theme-related PPV's -- as it at least sets them apart from the loads of other shows being offered -- I have to admit that I'm not a fan of this one. First and foremost, I think making three or four matches submission-related really takes the spectacle out of seeing somebody tap out. Triple H tapping out to some guy at WrestleMania XX was so special because, up until that point (if I'm not mistaken), it had never happened. That was far more special than if it had been a typical pin. I mean, what's so great about being somebody submit after you've already seen it twice in the past hour and a half? For that matter, I think this show kinda steps on the toes of Extreme Rules. When you have an I Quit Match, a Submission Match, a Falls Count Anywhere Match, and a Singapore Cane Match, it sounds an awful lot like Extreme Rules.
I'm also not so much a fan of the upcoming Hell in a Cell or the rumored (confirmed?) TLC: Tables, Ladders, and Chairs PPVs. Again, both of these stipulations have been established as a special attraction. Seeing them multiple times on one card takes away that specialness, especially with Hell in a Cell. And with TLC, it creates a dangerous precedent where talent is expected to one-up each other. I would much prefer they just rename No Way Out "Elimination Chamber," since that show has already established itself as having multiple Elimination Chamber matches to set up for WrestleMania.
I thought Melrose Place gave an impressive showing. They did a far better job than 90210 of integrating the classic characters with the new ones, and I feel like the murder mystery is a fun, suspenseful, and focused way of driving the season. They've done a nice job of placing suspicions on numerous characters, whether it's through motive, opportunity, or suspicious behavior. And honestly, how freakin' awesome is it having Michael Mancini back on our televisions? The show's only real downfall is that it's named "Melrose Place" and it's on the CW. If everything was the same, but under a different name and on ABC, people would be lauding it as the second coming of Desperate Housewives.
Vampire Diaries was a lot of fun, and most certainly worth a second viewing. If you remember from my Top Ten Cases: Hottest women on television list, I'm a big fan of Nina Dobrev. And I've always been a vampire enthusiast -- even before it was fashionable. So I had to give this show a shot. Some of the similarities to True Blood were a bit striking -- the protagonist is an orphan with a deadbeat brother, there's a girl with seemingly supernatural abilities (who has a "gram," no less), the warring vampires over the affections of one human female, and so on. But that's nit picking, and ultimately irrelevant. In the end, I really just enjoyed the characters as well as the overall conflict of the series -- especially between the two brothers. This season of True Blood really gained momentum when it focused on the Bill/Sookie/Eric triangle, and this show is doing that right off the bat. I most certainly recommend this series to anybody who's a fan of the HBO hit show.
Anyway, WWE's new Pay-Per-View, Breaking Point, is on tonight. And while I admire the company for these theme-related PPV's -- as it at least sets them apart from the loads of other shows being offered -- I have to admit that I'm not a fan of this one. First and foremost, I think making three or four matches submission-related really takes the spectacle out of seeing somebody tap out. Triple H tapping out to some guy at WrestleMania XX was so special because, up until that point (if I'm not mistaken), it had never happened. That was far more special than if it had been a typical pin. I mean, what's so great about being somebody submit after you've already seen it twice in the past hour and a half? For that matter, I think this show kinda steps on the toes of Extreme Rules. When you have an I Quit Match, a Submission Match, a Falls Count Anywhere Match, and a Singapore Cane Match, it sounds an awful lot like Extreme Rules.
I'm also not so much a fan of the upcoming Hell in a Cell or the rumored (confirmed?) TLC: Tables, Ladders, and Chairs PPVs. Again, both of these stipulations have been established as a special attraction. Seeing them multiple times on one card takes away that specialness, especially with Hell in a Cell. And with TLC, it creates a dangerous precedent where talent is expected to one-up each other. I would much prefer they just rename No Way Out "Elimination Chamber," since that show has already established itself as having multiple Elimination Chamber matches to set up for WrestleMania.
2 comments:
Well, I look forward to March 28th when WWE puts on their biggest PPV of the year, WWE "Regular Match" 26.
They're changing all the other names to dumb generic match types, why not? I suppose we should be happy this one wasn't called "Submissions Match".
I'm especially unimpressed with "Bragging Rights." And perhaps it's because it shares its name with the greatest wrestling game of all time, but I was quite fond of "No Mercy." Hell, it's the event that MADE Edge, Christian, Jeff Hardy, and Matt Hardy -- four future World Champions (depending on your opinion of the ECW title).
Post a Comment