lol they're not the best lookers but its the results that matter. To be fair most Samsungs of a generation also tend to look the same.
I wouldn't get really get a monitor for media use; I'd get a decent TV. The monitors at the 30" range usually tend to have extremely high resolutions for business work (2560x1600), rather than being intended for use as media screens. Monitors don't always support the range of refresh rates or processing you might like to give the best/smoothest picture and motion, and having the much higher resolution than the source matter results in heavy upscaling which can sometimes make things look...not so nice. Essentially, a TV is designed for media, whereas a monitor is designed for general usage. I know that's a generalisation, but it's more or less correct. If you were only gaming (via a high end PC) for example, then the monitor WOULD be better, but for media/HTPC use, I'd say the TV is the better choice.
I'm not massively fluent on Panny's currently LCDs, as I always paid a lot more attention to thier Plasma range, but if you take a look at sites like avforums, some of the people there spend quite a bit of time with a lot of the screens, and the reviews they do tend to be pretty good as well.
All the manufacturers tend to use a grade system, so you'll have different class bands in thier range, and then screens within that class band, as you go up the band you get more expensive, but tend to get more features, better electronics, sometimes a better panel etc.
Here's an example of a review of one of Panny's current LCDs, the entry model. The review seems to rate it down for lack of features, but crucially the picture is recommended as good.
The TX-L32E3B makes its strongest impact with sharpness when watching high-definition content. Detail levels are striking for a relatively small set, easily revealing individual hairs and facial pores during closeups.
Crucially, this impressive clarity isn't accompanied by the sort of noise that would suggest the sharpness is being forced; grain levels aren't excessive, edges don't have the tell-tale glow of clumsy edge enhancement and any noise that might be in a source isn't given the extra prominence that sometimes results from resolution boosting technology.
The lack of conspicuous over-processing contributes to an extremely natural performance, even with standard-definition pictures.
If you do want to crank up the sharpness you can experiment with the Resolution Enhancer without having to worry about it making pictures look too artificial (if you stick to using it on its lowest setting, at any rate).
The TX-L32E3B's pictures might not be the most eye-catchingly vibrant around, but seem to require little tweaking for optimum Blu-ray performance. Of course, this is just as well given that the tools available for adjusting hues are practically non-existent.
The IPS Alpha panel enables the pictures to retain colour and contrast from an appreciably wider viewing angle than most LCD TVs, while gamers should enjoy the TX-L32E3B's astonishingly quick response time (just 10ms), which all but eradicates input lag.
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/au...s/panasonic-tx-l32e3b-958452/review?artc_pg=3
You can get that screen for £400, dependant on what you want to spend. Seriously though there are lots of good TVs out there from multiple brands. Set yourself a budget and a target size (realistically -ie not a 50" for peanuts!) and then do the reading, and you'll get a good TV.