Question: What do you believe are Dynasty’s real chances at succeeding after the catastrophic Melrose Place revamp? The CW has not had a good track record with soaps. —David
Matt Roush: For me, the real comparison here is not to The CW’s failed reboots of latter-day Spelling shows but to TNT’s wan remake of Dallas, which couldn’t survive the death of its J.R., the great Larry Hagman. The original Dynasty was the Texas blockbuster’s glittery ’80s counterpart, a wallow in conspicuous Reagan-era consumption and brawling bitchery, and reviving it carries significant risks, both in terms of not being able to live up to the original and in terms of being the wrong show at the wrong time. How much allure and appeal will the Carringtons even have in a polarizing Age of Trump? The pilot episode is trashy enough, and the newly multi-cultural casting—Crystal (the new Krystle) is Latina, for a start— is intriguing, and as in the original first season, there’s no sight of Alexis yet. (The timing of her arrival and casting will be critical to the show’s long-term success.) I agree it’s troubling that The CW wasn’t even able to reignite the pop-culture lightning of 90210 and Melrose in those revivals. Resurrecting this relic may be even more problematic. And I still can’t wrap my head around Grant Show as the new, younger incarnation of Blake Carrington.
To submit questions to TV Critic Matt Roush, go to: tvinsider.com

