ABC's 666 Park Avenue: Is It Worth Another Visit?

666 Park Avenue PremiereSpooky, seductive and all kinds of sexy, ABC’s 666 Park Avenue officially opened its doors this Sunday at 10/9c — but how likely are you to frequent the Drake again this season?

We’re eager to hear your thoughts on the supernatural series, but first, a brief refresher: Wide-eyed Midwesterners Jane and Henry (Rachael Taylor and Dave Annable) are met with the deal of a lifetime upon relocating to New York City: agree to manage an historic apartment building and, in turn, become tenants in any Manhattanite’s dream dwelling.

There is, of course, a catch — though one unbeknownst to them: the owner of the building (played to creepy perfection by Terry O’Quinn) and his wife (Vanessa Williams) have some seemingly devilish ties, as demonstrated by their bringing back to life — and then killing again — a deceased tenant, among other unexplainable incidents. However, to hear the Lost alum’s character explain it, what he does is merely “fulfill dreams.”

RELATED | Dave Annable Cheers His New 666 Park Avenue Address

In a Rosemary’s Baby-type turn of events, Jane, an architectural pro, begins to investigate the Drake and its mysterious goings-on while her other half Henry remains (almost) cluelessly smitten with their new abode.

Robert Buckley, Mercedes Masöhn and Erik Palladino also co-star as various inhabitants and employees of the haunted housing unit.

Now it’s your turn, TVLiners: Hit the poll below to let us know what grade you give 666 Park Avenue, then back up your pick in the comments!

Comments are monitored, so don’t go off topic, don’t frakkin’ curse and don’t bore us with how much your coworker’s sister-in-law makes per hour. Talk smart about TV!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. iMember says:

    I’d say so. I’m definitely interested to see more. Since it’s after Revenge (which OMG WAS SO GOOD TONIGHT! Let’s talk about it.) it’ll definitely have me tuning in again.

  2. tvaddict says:

    I thought American Horror Story did the whole creepy horror TV series better but I will continue to watch it.

    • dude says:

      I think AHS was a much more creepy horror show but I think 666 is more campy/soapier. I like that mix of soap/horror. I think it will do well with Revenge and Once.

    • L says:

      yea main networks like abc, cbs, fox, nbc, cant really go to creepy and gruesome. basically since they are network tv, they have some restrictions. idk how much creepier they are gonna get but it can’t come close to AHS on a cable channel lol. :)

  3. Andrea says:

    I’m so confused by this show. The creepy factor wasn’t really creepy enough. I’ll give it another try though since it’s after Revenge.

  4. Esaul says:

    Rating wise, I think 666 stands a good chance. OOAT did great last year. Curious about the Revenge move. It did excellent Wednesday. I’ll check out this one in a bit. Busy watching Family Guy T_T

  5. I like it, yes it’s kinda slow but it’s only the first epiosde. I will watch it every sunday.

  6. teamo says:

    I expected so much wasn’t creepy or scary enough..I knew just as much about this show as I do now after watching the pilot. I’ll give it another chance based on the last 10 minutes. I hope it picks up quick because I wanna like this show.

    • Temperence says:

      Yes, it just really didn’t grab me. Too many people were dying at the same time, and it looked much to easy without it being sinister enough from the Terry and Vanessa couple.

  7. Wrstlgirl says:

    Loved it!

  8. Lyndsey says:

    I enjoyed it! Someone said AHS did the creepy horror story better but remember they only had, what?, 13 episodes to fill up so each one had to be chock full of plot! Meanwhile, I’m sure 666 Park Ave is assuming they’ll at least get one season so they’ll draw things out more slowly. I’ll turn in because (1) I’m a sucker for these Faustian type stories, (2) I really want to know what was going on in that basement 90 years ago, and (3) I adore Terry O’Quinn, especially when he can play evil SO well!!!

  9. Emily says:

    I feel like it doesn’t know what it wants to be. Is it horror? Mystery? A soap? The roommate and I spent the entire episode rolling our eyes at the contrived writing. It also seemed really thrown together, lacking any kind of connections between the characters. The entire premise seems like a writing exercise you come up with in middle school…
    I don’t watch anything else on ABC Sundays so I won’t be giving it another shot.

    • Temperence says:

      I like the cast, but I have to completely agree. It was… tepid at best.

    • Lena120 says:

      I agree with most of what you said. I’m not sure what its identity is. Is it taking a page from the original Dark Shadows with the soap horror mix? Thus far, all the plots seem very contrived. Prime example is Robert Buckley’s character with the whole Peeping Tom thing. When I saw that I cringed, because I knew where it was headed. Gavin comes across as more of a douche than the devil. If you’re going to be that guy, BE that guy. And Olivia doesn’t do much at all. I’ll give it another chance since this was just the pilot. They have room and time to improve.

    • arianeb says:

      Agreed. My review: The show can so far be summed up in three words: “Haunted Apartment Building”. So far they showed a bunch of characters doing stuff without explaining their motivations. Is Terry O’Quinn’s character supposed to be the devil? or is he like Mr. Rourke on Fantasy Island, where giving people what they want can lead to their own destruction? The problem is, I am not sure I care.

  10. S says:

    It wasn’t the best pilot but because of the actors I will watch again hoping it will get better.

  11. Ana says:

    I’m not too fond of this genre but with Terry O’Quinn, Vanessa Williams, Robert Buckley and Rachael Taylor I had to give it a shot. I wouldn’t expect the gruesome to be too heavy because this is network tv. AHS can get away with much more because they are on cable. I didn’t find it extraordinary but it was good enough to keep me interested. The storylines were kind of choppy and it was lacking a certain sense of continuity but hopefully the writers will correct this as this progress. My biggest surprise was Rachael Taylor’s acting. She’s clearly the main character here and she did a phenomenal job. And the ‘faustian’ character, Terry, is obviously evil but I can’ bring myself to dislike him. He does the most heinous things with a smile on his face, like he’s just sipping tea. Love to watch him!

  12. Amanda says:

    The pilot didn’t grab me like others have this year, but I think this has a lot of potential. I’m going to keep tuning to see if it picks up.

  13. Ang says:

    Not really into the creepy genre of television, but this was seductive, sexy and suspenseful! I’ll definitely be tuning in again next week!

  14. Chloe says:

    I was disappointed because I expected Vanessa Williams & Terry O’Quinn to be the stars and instead, they were more the co-stars [especially Vanessa]. For my taste, we saw [IMHO] way too much of the the blonde with the black eyebrows & her rather bland guy, Henry. I’ll probably watch it once or twice more before deciding whether to stick with it or not.

  15. Emelie says:

    I decided to watch due to Dave Annable and Robert Buckley. I miss Brothers and Sisters and One Tree Hill. It was ok. Held my interest and kept me guessing. I think I will keep watching. I think in time it will draw me in.

  16. Spencer says:

    I actually really enjoyed the show. These three Sunday night shows are a POWERHOUSE!

  17. Tricia says:

    It had a hard time keeping my interest, but that could be more on me. And Gabriel Mann’s abs.

  18. Steven says:

    It was definitely an interesting show with great potential. After watching it, my wife and I agreed that it contained elements from two superb television shows (“American Horror Story” and “Supernatural”), as well as two movies, (“The Shining” and “The Devil’s Advocate”). While Terry O’Quinn seems to be the Satan character, I’m wondering if the writers aren’t throwing out a red herring, as Vanessa Williams seemed to be a bit underutilized. If I had to guess, Vanessa Williams is actually the Devil and O’Quinn is the Crossroads Demon from “Supernatural”. Just a thought.

    I definitely wasn’t expecting the pilot to come right out and say it was a supernatural thriller. I expected that to be slowly revealed over the course of the first season. Still, it was good enough that my wife and I will be watching it again next week.

    • L says:

      Love it. Demon deals–cool badness but no hell hounds (frowny face). Glad to see Vanessa Williams. I will be back to watch next week. Can’t wait to see what happens. I’m so used to watching Supernatural the demon deals on 666 excite me

    • Exactly what I’m thinking Steven, especially since the network had Vanessa doing the talk show tour to promote, then to see her “underutilized”….I am waiting for a “shift” in who’s actually “The Devil” here. Inh any case I am enjoying it very much. I get the same Devils Advocate vibe you mentioned.

  19. Juan says:

    It was ok I agree, they were a bit slow and not as bug on the scares but it’s the pilot and for me supernatural shows take longer to adjust so ill def keep watching

  20. Ashly says:

    I liked it and I love O’Quinn and Williams, but I think it might be too scary for me. That elevator scene was way intense and exactly the reason why I’m afraid of elevators. Maybe I’ll try to watch earlier in the day on Hulu or something, but I have a feeling I probably won’t watch it again.

  21. BTM says:

    Honestly? Sin bores me. I lasted about 10 minutes, not long after the voyeurism.

  22. StupidPeopleShutUp says:

    I thought it was fine. I have been looking forward to it. I think it has plenty of room to figure itself out as a show. I found Jane and Henry to be rather dull, but I enjoyed Terry O’Quinn immensely and thought Vanessa Williams killed it. Frankly, AHS pushed the “ooooh, we’re sooo shocking” envelope too much for me, and while “666” could use a goose or two in the scary factor department, I liked that it didn’t try to cram tons of creepy into 45 minutes. I have not watched ABC Primetime since they announcef the cancellation of “AMC” and “OLTL”, but I thought this deserved a shot, given ABC’s recent executive ststements of support regarding “GH”. I may watch “Once”, too, if I can catch up. Not watching that one hurt, I ain’t gonna lie.

  23. angelasl813 says:

    The book was more interesting than this pilot & different.

  24. Emily says:

    I actually like it…I will tune in again because of the actors and the teen girl that seems to be some kind of psychic

  25. BonesForever says:

    Just didn’t do it for me. After Revenge, it was a real letdown.

  26. Lisa (@KittyKay3) says:

    I’ll give it another week. I am already a fan of OUAT and Revenge. My head hurt from keeping track of characters and story-lines by the end of the 3 hour block. 666 is the weakest of the lineup and probably won’t make it for me.

    Someone above mentioned the parallels between 666 and Fantasy Island. I felt shades of that too.

    The Sunday night block needs a show with a touch of humor, dark humor is fine. The night is too heavy.with 666 in the mix.

  27. Horrible. Turned it off before the opening credits. Sad, because I like Vanessa Williams. At least there’s Copper.

    • wrstlgirl says:

      How can you say it was horrible if you didn’t even watch past opening credits? Sheesh, give things a valid chance at least.

  28. George says:

    The angel statues on Doctor Who (a supposed kids’ show) are creepier than anything on this mess of a show.

  29. Chet Norris says:

    first thing i thought of was rosemary’s baby..if they want the blonde to get pregnant at some point then i know they stole the idea.

  30. Rain says:

    Terry O’Quinn and Robert Buckley made me give this a try but I couldn’t make it past the first half hour. It was so slow and seemed to have no rhyme or reason to the plot. The couple of threads of stories they managed to give all seemed like rip offs of other shows/movies. And while I LOVED Locke, Terry’s character in this didn’t come across as evil and sinister, he just seemed like an @sshole. I’ll stick with Copper Sunday’s at 10 thanks.

  31. S says:

    This show is just trying a little too hard. It seemed to try to shove too many story lines at viewers too fast in order to give them a background mythology when in reality they should have left a little to the imagination. The person who said Devil’s Advocate had it right.
    Terry is playing his character in much the same way Pacino did his in DA but with less flair.
    For me I just found it hard to watch people who are seemingly city smart, walk into a building and not check out the place they plan to live before accepting the job, not reading the contracts before they sign, not getting weirded out in the least by tenants with bloody covered hands and pouring in sweat, people being hurt by rouge elevators and accepting gifts worth thousands by people they barely know…
    Wouldn’t someone at least question more than just the mosaic on the floors? Wouldn’t you at least worry that your boss and his wife were hitting on you? Ha!
    The show just seemed a

  32. Greg says:

    Thougt it was more Fantasy Island’ish…only with a little more evil twist

  33. I found it meh at best but what really annoyed me is why a lawyer wouldn’t read through contracts before signing them!!