I think it’s trash. The guy lives in the same town as the entire original cast of cheers. Yet has zero desire to see any of them. In fact he makes a joke in episode one saying that he spent too much time in that bar. It’s really character assassination. Going to that bar was never about the drinking it was about being with the people who congregated in that building. That is the central theme behind the finale episode of cheers being that Sam’s true love was being in that bar with those people. But Frasier acts like those people meant nothing to him in this reboot.
@@blankname6629 I agree. Maybe those actors didn't want to join or maybe they will later in the series. I didn't know how much I would like it since I LOVE Frasier and appreciate it more now that I am older. However watching the reboot was nice. Its not like the original but he is in a new setting with new characters. Some of the humor feel flat for me but that's because I can think about an older episode of Frasier and almost choke myself with laughter but that was a different era. Hopefully they won't do the same thing they did with Murphy Brown. LOL
@@didralamond8145 people keep saying it’s a new setting but it’s not. It’s literally the same town as cheers was in. I think it was a royal screw up to put it back in Boston.
@@blankname6629 I would have liked to see how his life would have been in Chicago! I wouldn't have mind to see how it would have been for him to be on TV! LOL Especially from the several episodes they had on the original Frasier where he would be on TV.
You nailed this one. I wrote a piece on it elsewhere, with some of those thoughts shared below. A fatally flawed reboot. John Mahoney's absence is forgivable. He died. But replacing virtually the entire former cast with wan copies or worse, total departures that made the previous franchise such a smash is lethal. First of all, has everyone forgotten that 'Freddie' as a child was the allergy-prone, sissified offspring. Somehow, he's morphed into a cleft-chinned firefighter with a roomie and a baby - the normal guy playing weekend daddy in this reboot with a marked 'stud' quality that would never have come from two people like Frasier and Lilith. In lieu of Niles, we get David - rebranded with much of the old Freddie's social hang-ups and shortcomings, but also, thinly, to be aping David Hyde Pierce without ever attaining the former's zestful joy for the obtuse one-liner. What most of the new cast has utterly forgotten is that it isn't enough to recite a line written by some clever screen scribe. Much of the dialogue here has merit and occasional wit. But it's lost on actors who merely read back what's on the page. One could believe the original cast as real characters with those lines actually emanating from their lips. These guys are just hitting their talking points with shallowness. The cast here, unlike the previous assemblage in the old show, lack the instantly endearing quality the old cast had in spades. There's not a one here who is as memorable. I kept hoping for this to get better. It hasn't. And Kelsey Grammar, while never in doubt as a consummate pro, has past his prime as the anxiety-riddled/socially inept, class-conscious intellectual that was so charmingly off beat in the original show. Now, he's just an aged boor, so ensconced in his ways, he has an impossible time accepting that time has moved on. A real sad affair all around. I'll stick to my reruns of Cheers and the original Frasier. This reboot won't last. Not with this cast. Again, As I said. It's not necessarily the writing. It's the actors. They know their lines but bring no personality to their parts. Sorry, but from day one, episode one, John Mahoney, Jane Leeves, Peri Gilpin and David Hyde Pierce each established themselves as anchors of that show in the same way the cast of Cheers became instantly recognizable and beloved. Shelly Long and Ted Danson could have read the phone book for an entire episode and it would have been amusing. Few sitcoms instantly attain that level of recognizable success. I can only think of one other from the eighties that immediately clicked so well - The Golden Girls. In the 90's it took Friends a good half first season to build upon the initial characters. But the cast of the new Frasier have none of that staying power - none at all. There's no spark here. Think about it. You could have taken Kelsey Grammer out of an episode of the original Frasier and the show would have still been endlessly watchable, thanks to the strong support. Even the 'extras' like Edward Hibbert's cheesy food critic, Gil Chesterton or Dan Butler's Bulldog were sustainable in Grammer's absence. They carried scenes. Take Grammer out of even a brief scene in the new Frasier and it utterly falls flat and apart. If the producers want some advice, it's simple. Junk the reboot. Go back to the drawing board. Recast, and re-premiere. Get some faces that have personalities behind them. Every character on a sitcom needs to be 'a character'. You can't make it with just good-looking filler!
I can't agree with you more. I like the concept of the show, but its rehashing the same stuff from Frasier, like now its Frasiers turn to bond with his son. Honestly, if they were going to bring back Freddy, they should have brought the actor who played him, there is no replacing the original actor. I like the concept of Niles son but the actor who plays him is just so bad. They should have brought in an actor that could have the charm of Daphne but with Niles eccentric quirks. Another problem with the show is the setting. People won't mention it but honestly I just loved Frasiers old condo. The setting at the radio station felt alive. This new apartment of his feels cold and empty along with his classroom. If you ask me if they brought the original actor for Freddy and brought in a real good actor to play Niles son, then the focus should have been on them with Frasiers character coming to help, comfort or anything else. This new show feels like any other mediocre sitcom.
Wow. Normally I would write "TL;DR", but your eloquence really hits the nail on the head in what is wrong with this reboot. They really should have brought Trevor Einhorn back - I do not approve of this goy-washed Freddy.
I feel this series (so far, of course) has the soul of Frasier as we knew it - personality conflict, friendship, and a touch of classism. My main gripe with the show is how “Chuck Lorre” it feels; from the lighting, acting, set design, and production overall. Frasier had class, in both senses. This series is struggling to maintain that so far. But hey, it’s Frasier, I am a diehard fan, even went to Kerry Park in Seattle just to see Frasier’s apartment view in person. I am just happy to have more Frasier.
I was hoping to see more reviews on this show, but Im glad we got this one! I liked them, but both episodes definitely had a different vibe to it. It feels "modern," which is fine, but the original had a classiness to it. New sitcoms just don't have the same feel anymore. Maybe its because there's so many now
I agree! I wish more people were talking about this reboot or spin off whatever they want to call it. It has this modern vibe which is good but for this style of sit-com I wouldn't mind the older way but they want to appeal to a newer audience.
Most of todays sitcoms are crude and vulgar. This Fraser revival is witty and charming; not modern in that sense of the word and that's refreshing to say the least.
You literally said every single point i think about this series as well. As a die hard fan of the first 11 seasons… i hate to be pessimistic but its pretty much impossible to replace Martin and Niles . Some of the others like roz and daphne i prob could let someone else sub in for their roles in the new one but Niles and Martin are genuinely irreplaceable. Their magic is missing.I will watch to the end of the series and i hope my opinion is changed but this is definitely like drinking a bottle of flat coke .. your drinking it and every so often looking at the bottle and swirling it round hoping to taste what you were used to but after a few gulps you throw it out. We live in hope. Great review mate keep up the good work.
I do agree, I feel like they're trying too hard. If you go back and look at the first episode of the original show, there's a lovely foil for Frasier in Niles, who is a distinct personality, we meet his dad, who has a distinct personality... and so on. In this show, no one seems to have any real distinct personality, and no one is a foil for Frasier. Another issue is Frasier's lack of a life. In the old show, he was DOING things. He had his JOB, he had his relationship and coffee with Niles, and so on. Here, he seems kind of aimless. The biggest issue is, though, the writing. That very first scene had my eyes rolling. In walks Frasier, and he's greeted by someone we don't know like an old friend, as if we SHOULD know him. They have an awkward exchange about looking good... then stall, and start over. In comes Niles' son, and he's immediately rambling about taking sleeping pills and drinking coffee and then he passes out standing up, and suddenly wakes up... It's really bad to set up a joke and then IMMEDIATELY cash in on it. It was just so contrived. THEN we have the old friend talking about a goof in his class who fell down... which he describes in great detail, apparently never realizing the goofball is standing next to him... something I realized before he was more than three words into his story. Again, just so contrived... and this is just the first scene. Just trying SO, SO hard. The first scene of the old show was witty and clever. This one seems banal and cringy. I loved the old show, but I'm not impressed by what I've seen so far of this one. Though, I did love the tribute to John Mahoney at the end. I do understand David Hyde Pierce's decision to not return to Niles, but a brief cameo to say goodbye to his son, his brother and his father might have been nice.
I understand it will be strange for those that watched the old series and miss the original cast. However for many of us who were introduced to Frasier in Cheers, we had the same feelings when Frasier first aired. I enjoyed the first two episodes, there is only one actor that feels like the generic modern sitcom performance.
I find it a bit peculiar how you were aware in advance that Frasier would be the only returning main character and you still protest the new characters. You mention you don’t know these guys and they’re unfamiliar, but isn’t that the point of new characters? They’ll make themselves familiar as the series progresses. Kelsey Grammer’s portrayal of Frasier truly is the heart and soul of the original series and the new one; as long as Dr. Frasier Crane is still Dr. Frasier Crane, his friends around him will adhere to everything he built in the mid 90s.
It was in all the press only Frasier was returning. As to the new characters, wow are they poorly written and nothing but over used tropes - it's a steaming pile of unfunny - a HUGE steaming pile
I watched the two episodes, and was glad to see Kelsey. I did laugh and I did smile. My only criticism - And I had the same view before I watched the episodes - Is that they changed Freddy as a character. It is not realistic, and not entirely believable. They did so because they wanted someone to represent Martin in the new season.
I am glad to see Frasier again after all these years.Watched the first 2 episodes but we need to wait how they will built on the story and the new characters, also i am pretty sure old characters will pop in from time to time so lets wait and see
“Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should” A nightmare on elm street 2010. Friday the 13th 2009 Anything after child’s play 3, Hellraiser 3 I know i know, unpopular opinion
I didn't expect to be equal or even similar to the original, but the Frasier character is so fun and Grammer portrays him with such passion that I will definitely give this series more than a couple of chances.
I’m not sure why you would expect it to be similar to the original Frazier. Many years have passed and he moved back to Boston. I would expect that things would be very different. I like it. Give it time and stop comparing the show that lasted many seasons to one that only showed two episodes. A lot of times the first two episodes set the stage and give a lot of info on the past.
You know, when Frasier originally came out, people complained that it was nothing like Cheers (in fact, there were critics who said the writing was bad just because it retconned some facts about Frasier that were established on Cheers), and while this is more connected to the original Frasier than Frasier itself was to Cheers, it still can't be the same show. Even if you had the same cast, it wouldn't be the same show, because it's in a different time and there are natually different writers and different circumstances. So, no, I don't think this was ever going to be like the original Frasier, and this show is currently at a huge disadvantage because there are only two episodes and we've had 20 to 30 years with the episodes of the original Frasier, so I think we should give this a chance (and this is coming from someone who adores the original Frasier and will re-watch any episode).
@@lenawagenfuehr53 I don't know, as overbearing as she was, Lilith wasn't the most present parent, and I can totally buy her washing her hands of him when he decides to drop out of Harvard... I also completely buy that with such an overbearing mother and absentee father, Freddy would end up taking more after his grandfather, the person who listened to him the most...
@@lenawagenfuehr53 I wasn't a fan of Freddie atall in this. He seemed abit arrogant without many redeeming qualities in his personality. Just felt like a generic sitcom character.
No kidding. Total miscasting. As a boy, Freddie, in the original Frasier was a child so inept at any physical activity, and so into intellectual pursuits, there is NO WAY he ever grew up to be a rugged fireman. And stock character doesn't begin to describe the way the rest of the cast fits into their nondescript roles.@@mikeysexton1166
I agree with your sentiments. Kelsey feels just like current day Frasier and the nephew is great. I also like the jaded Professor friend. The remainder feel like they’re in a different comedy show. Also disappointed the original son is not in this and had assumed he was no longer acting, especially without the other originals, it would have been nice to have him in this.
I've binge watched the original series several times, one of my favorites shows of all time. For the most part I really enjoyed the first two episodes of this reboot. Except once thing. David. I actually thought David was terrible. He was not funny, just an idiot. Yes, he is clumsy like Niles, but that's it. Niles was pretentious, clever, and smart. David is a kiss ass to Frasier, he reminds me of Jar Jar from Star Wars.
I had a few LOLs - one that comes to mind was when David let go of the dresser he and Freddie were carrying, then turned around to ask Freddy, “There’s catnip for women?”
Aww, I watched this series with my dad too in high school. Olivia and David were a bit much for me. Kelsey is great and the other characters show promise for me. Dialogue was pretty good in my opinion and reminded me of the old series especially Fraser’s. I really could have done without the Olivia drooling over Freddie bit (it came out of no where for her character and was so awkward).
I thought it was mildly entertaining, but I felt that the jokes were flat & a lot of the characters were genetic. The dialogue lacked the wit & sparkle of the original, & the show lacked the Wodehousian touches in the original. I always enjoyed the type of stories where Frasier & Niles would get involved in an imbroglio & their plans would go awry. The joke was was on them, but with Martin to take them down a peg or two & remind them of what’s what, there was a humility to them. They were loveably pompous. That’s what I find lacking from the new series, but since it takes a lot of series a while to hit their straps, I’m willing to give it a go & stick with it.
You mean generic, and yes, a lot of the characters and jokes feel forced. I don't buy the Freddy character at all, nor any of his friends. Eve lost her partner and is a single mother to a young baby - she is waaay too upbeat and happy. She'd be a pile of hormones and grief in real life. Really bad writing.
@@lenawagenfuehr53 I did mean generic. Thanks for pointing it out - stupid auto. I totally agree with what you said. It wasn’t just that the supporting characters were not funny; they didn’t ring true. Even though Freddy explained why he kept his living arrangement a secret from Frasier, I just didn’t buy it. You’re right: it’s bad writing. I hope that when Lilith enters the fray, things pick up.
just finished 2 episodes and brought me to tears as a parent of 30somethings who disregard their parents who tried to give them everything they never had only to be treated with disregard for a period of time...brought me to tears! there is NOTHING good coming from Hollyweed...except new Frasier!! God bless yas!
Frasier and Home Improvement. What a combo. Loved them both growing up. Great video btw. I would say, I did enjoy the first two episodes. I get what you're saying about the bland vibes. I felt things got better as they went on but I do think the secondary characters in Frasier (Niles, Daphne etc. are really what made it shine). I also think the apartment setting in the original series felt a lot more like a real apartment. All of the current sets scream "set" to me. All being said, I'll be watching every episode this season and I'll hold off on final judgement until the end.
I watched the first couple of episodes and my heart sank and I started to feel nauseous. I thought I'll stick with it and watch the 3rd episode I couldn't finish it. It was truly awful. The canned laughter mixed with the studio audience grates on you and the replacement actors have zero presence. I feel as if Frasier is staring in somone elses sitcom. I just cannot get over how bad this is. Rest in peace Frasier we loved you!
I just watched the first two episodes as well, and it wasn't too bad all things considered. I grew up watching Frasier and later Cheers over and over again. They are both two of my favorite comfort shows of all time. I did know that Martin wouldn't be returning because I knew that Mahoney was dead, but I didn't know Niles, Daphne, or Roz wouldn't be coming back. I was really hoping to see them. I agree the humor felt very "off". But it just felt like a 2020's show. I think almost all shows since the late 2010s have felt "off" and awkward in a strange way. Almost like imposters. I do, however, think Frasier was pretty well performed by Grammer. He felt like frasier, still, but some of his lines felt wrong. Not Grammer's fault. The end of episode one was rather heartfelt, and it was bittersweet seeing and hearing Martin for one more line at the end.
I watched both episodes, and I feel like the script was written by Taylor Swift. The humour is quite obvious and telegraphed. And the context is too with the perceived class divide and Chaplin gags and people walk in and out like it is Friends. It is missing the set piece of the big apartment as well. I like Lyndhurst but he seems a bit subdued like he is under a gag order or something.
I was delightfully surprised how much I enjoyed the first two episodes of this reboot. Frasier’s character is still so true and I think we just need a few more episodes for the other characters to have a chance to develop more. I really like the nephew character and I think he could be a favourite on the show. It’s unfair to expect the show to be just like it was before. So far, I think it’s a good update and I love that’s it’s a progression of the story.
I agree with you so much on this show it feels so empty like it's star but it's not the reason Frasier was so great back in the 90's was cuz it's cast was great Frasier didn't have to carry the ball every night like it feels he has to in this series...this series I don't feel is going to work very well
I expected the original Freddy actor but got over it in the first couple minutes. Can’t wait to see more scenes with the stuffy professor friend in the classroom (and pub). David is hilariously like Niles - LOVE how he looks up to, and respects his ‘famous’ Uncle Frasier. One complaint (literally, one). *In what universe is that Fraser Crane’s apartment???* I understand he just purchased the building and moved in so I’ll cut him some slack, but he better call in the contractors, and quick!
it shows there's at least potential with this show. the fact Martin planned it and I can see Frasier and Niles fight about it shows how good the original was. this series does the dramatic stuff good i'll give it that.@@MalabarTheGreat
If the reboot tries to duplicate the humor of the OG Frasier, playing off Frasier’s pomposity with David playing a mini-Niles - I am not sure if I will continue watching. I honestly did not have one LOL moment in the reboot pilot, whereas I had many in each OG series episode - but I did shed a tear seeing Frasier & Freddy talked about Martin. If the reboot takes different angle, a more serious & dramatic tone - family, teaching - with a touch of Frasier’s humor I think there would be a good I will continue watching. Recall how Ed Asner went from being funny in MTM to a serious Lou Grant, it was a brilliant evolution of Lou. But episode 1 & 2 seemed to rely on Frasier's elevated personality looking down on the common people for laughs - I'm not optimistic initially. Take it this way, the Pilot of Lou Grant and the Mandalorian immediately caught my attention as something very different and compelling compared to the previous MTM and Star Wars episodes - not a regurgitation of the past.
I like it so far. I can see it lasting a few seasons. I hope they dont run the show dry though. Good quality over quantity and then wrap up the series.
The 9ther character that is sorely missed is Eddie. Getting another pet to be Frasier's "nemesis" could help the show, although Moose and Enzo couldn't be replaced
Somethings weird though. It seems more like a play or skit Not sure if they used filters or something on the previous show but when watching the new one it's doesn't seem like a tv show. Also felt like they were trying to hard to make it funny...
who's to say old characters won't or can't make a cameo or reappearance because it isn't beyond of realms of possibility just to write them in and you don't reveal your entire hand yet. this could be a slow burner to become its own humour.
It's basically saying Frasier...left Seattle...moved to Chicago and became Oprah...then moved back to Boston where Lilith has raised a sports fanatic son. But besides that...
I agree with your comments, great review. I do enjoy Frasier, the early seasons especially they were very fun. The chemistry between Frasier and his quite particular brother was very fun to watch. The romance with Daphne was also well written. I do hope, like you, I believe, that the new characters will bloom. The university director role has potential. I am quite impressed by Kelsey Grammer attempting this feat to, in essence revive a classic. I sincerely hope that he has the humility to understand that, like you put it so very well in your review, his role must not be at the forefront all of the time. It's like a dance and sometime making your partner look good, steals the show and everyone is looking... At you.
The pilot gave me a lot to like. Kelsey is always great as Frasier and it’s like no time has passed at all for the character. I also really like Alan. His type of droll humor fits in perfectly with the type of humor Frasier has always been known for. I also really like the tribute to Martin. It was tasteful. It was respectful. It fully captured the person Martin was and it was a very human and understandable reason as to why Freddie didn’t want to say goodbye. It was a beautiful moment between him and Frasier. When Freddie said “I miss him” I believed it because I too miss Martin and it was a beautiful tribute to him and the type of seriousness Frasier was known for. The pilot was a good start. Unfortunately, the pilot was a fluke and I have enjoyed very little since then.
Was not the original show also Frazier focused the first couple of episodes and slowly started to focus more on the rest of the characters. He is in Boston so how will they explain him not going to Cheers for some suds.
They mentioned he did a song at Martin's funeral. They ran out of things for Bulldog to do in Frasier, and quietly wrote him out...I don't see him turning up in Boston
Kelsey as Frasier continues to be spot on....the problem is the rest of the characters. Maybe it's too early but the chemistry is just not there...but it's not that bad and I would watch again.
I miss the time where tv shows got a fair chance to grow into what they'd eventually become. These days, everyone's a critic and if a series doesn't hit the ground running they're a goner even before they got a fair chance.
Nah, I disagree. I thought there were several decent laughs throughout both episodes. The John Mahoney tribute was a perfect moment. David Hyde-Pierce and John Mahoney were lightning in a bottle and that may not happen with any of these new characters but it doesn’t mean this show won’t be worthwhile.
You know, when the original Frasier started, I’m sure people who were used to see him in Cheers were a bit put off at first by the lack of people from Cheers and all the new characters. I wasn’t charmed 100% by the first episode but I think we need to watch a few episodes to have a real taste of this new version of Frasier. I think the type of humour is not quite as witty as in the original series but again there might be some adjustments in the next few weeks. I’m gonna give it a chance because it’s new and obviously it’ll be a bit different and we need to get used to that first, before we can really appreciate what it’s attempting to do.
It’s not as witty I watched episode one and didn’t laugh once. It feels like a cheap knockoff of the original. It would have made a lot more sense to not cast this in Boston. Doing that makes you wonder why he does not go see his old pals at cheers. The bar closed but most of the people stayed in that town.
I loved the original from the first episode but this is truly awful. It's worse than I thought it would be and the locations are so depressing. The replacement actors have zero presence. They made a really bad choice. Could not even make it to the end of the 3rd episode the canned laughter mixed in with the studio audience grates on you. All I can say is rest in peace Frasier.
They should have left well enough alone because Frasier ended at the right time with all of the characters moving on with their lives, Frasier seems incomplete and slightly lost without Niles and Daphne and the other characters and the new ones simply dont work so I don't think I'll be watching anymore episode's,
Didn't know what to expect from your review, but have to say I agree with you one hundred percent - and it makes me sad to say so. These first two episodes were as you say: insipid, bland and uninspired with the exception of Kelsey's performance of Frasier. Gotta wonder if missing parts of the original - including all those whacky calls coming in to Frasier's radio show for both he and Roz to react to - will keep this from coming anywhere near the comedic genius of before. Freddy seems both miscast and poorly written and the character of David is merely a hint of either of his parents, even given that he delivered a couple of the better lines. And its a smalll thing, but definitely noticeable: Frasier's new place has no resemblance to the high level of taste evidenced in Frasier's home in Seattle. I sure was looking forward to the show but now simply don't care.
I think we need to give the show a chance to develop and to grow on us. While this is a “continuation” of the old Frasier - but it isn’t. So let’s enjoy it and let it grow.
The irony is that this review could easily been done right after the Frasier Season One premiere..! Move to the other side of the country? NO reference to the previous (beloved) show? The tonal shift between the Cheers finale and Frasier premiere? 😊
I don't know why, but my biggest gripes were the sets and both of the girl characters. The sets look cheap, both literally and for the characters in the show. I really have trouble believing Frasier would live in that building, whether he bought it or not. The girls were just annoying and had no unique personality quirks like Ros or Daphne had.
Eve is supposed to be a woman who is unexpectedly a single mom after her partner was killed - she shows no sign of grief or post partum hormones. Do they have any women in the writers room? I read that Meryl Streep stepped in and re-wrote a speech her character was supposed to give in Kramer vs Kramer - she won an Oscar. Someone needs to do the same with every line Eve is supposed to say.
I don't think it's fair to compare the first 2 episodes to peak frasier. Sitcoms take a bit of time to get the characters in their groove. I was happily surprised by how much I enjoyed the first 2 episodes (might be better than some of the late series episodes)
I only watched a few clips since I don't have Paramount+, and the new humor falls flat for a Fraiser revival. Feels like a fish out of water story with a lack of the smart humor the original had. I expected Frasier, but got Young Sheldon from what I saw. I mean Frederick should still have some of the class for being the son of Lilith and Frasier but acts like an average Joe. I understand if he didn't follow their lifestyle, but even Lilith would have him growing up to be honest and respectful with his family.
The main problem isn't the dynamic, Frasier is best when he's bouncing off of anyone, and Grammer kept that aspect true to form....however its the blatant suspense of disbelief moment that the writers requires you take in for little quips and or gags. Like Frasier not knowing anything about Baseball.....when in fact, he was best friends with Sam....who played on the fucking Socks. Or how they shoehorn in Alan, who Frasier apparently knew for decades in Boston. Its a slap in the face to the fans who paid attention. I'm with Pierce on this one, there's nothing left for him to do, I'd also add, there's nothing left for Frasier to do...its the same comedic beats, the low hanging fruit of common psychological tropes that somehow can't figure out, and of course, the baby gag. The show just feels like Grammer wanted to make everyone laugh again, which is fine, but do so with respect to your own ethos. And that's honestly how I feel about it the show so far....So much low hanging fruit, you can smell the member berries. 5.5 out 10 (For now).
Enjoyed your perspective on the new Frasier. My main gripe was Niles isn’t on the show. I don’t mind new characters on a new show it comes with the territory but Niles being there with Frasier would have added more gravitas to the new Frasier show and helped anchor the comedy as a comedy duo project. I always thought of the original as a buddy comedy with Frasier and Niles. But also if you exclude Nile’s for the sake of argument not having any other returning characters like a Roz for example it turns into a soft reboot of original Frasier. Doesn’t exactly subvert my expectations, everything being a soft reboot nowadays doesn’t help the concept.
I love this show. I was a passing fan of the original show. I ended up watching the final season of Frasier and I think the spin-off flows nicely. I laughed out loud watching this show.
It's normal that we're a little lost with the new characters. Frasier moved across the country back to Boston. The same way, all these characters we learned to love (in the 90s Frasier were new to us when that series started). It's impossible to feel close to all these new characters after only 2 episodes. Furthermore, if someone moves across the country, you wouldn't see his friends from his old work place stopping by all the time. It's a little unfair to expect this show to pick up where the previous one ended. We got the chance to know and appreciate a superb cast on the original show. But it didn't happen in 2 episodes back then
The other characters needs to win a spot in the series. Don't hate the new Frasier for choosing that way. A new town/city means also new characters. Yes we still love the old Frasier show, I think that was and still the best comedy sitcom beside The Golden Girls! Hopefully, we can enjoy the new Frasier show like we all did...
I have only seen the first episode, but I wouldn't call it "soulless" at this point. It does lack a certain spark with its humour, though. You're never going to replicate the humour from the original show, unless you get the original writers to return. It's just never going to happen. One line stood out to me when comparing/contrasting the humour, and it was when Frasier says, "This is bad sherry." It's a line that could've had an excellent punch from Grammer had it been something completely different. Instead, it's just an obvious poke at the quality of the drink. It's too obvious. There's no subtlety there. Still, the episode was fine enough. I appreciated some aspects of it. There were a few touching moments, which I always appreciate. The heartfelt moments felt more appropriate than the humour, which means the show isn't delivering the laughs. But maybe that'll change. One final thing I definitely didn't like was the dismissal of Frasier's relationship with Charlotte. I didn't even think they'd mention her, so I was surprised when they had. However, they dismissed that entire plot point in one line. They constructed the entire conclusion of Frasier's arc from the original series to hinge on that relationship, and whether or not it was going to work out in Chicago. For it all to be thrown aside with one line for laughs was a massive disappointment for me. I get that they don't want to explain all of it and whatnot, but they could've treated that a lot better. The first episode loses major points for me with that. We'll see how the rest goes...
What you said about feeling like the Frasier character being sort of “lost in a sea of unfamiliar characters” totally resonates with me. I just finished the pilot episode, and feel like it’s missing something. It’s missing the chemistry between characters we saw right from the beginning in the original series. Since we can’t have any of the other characters from the original series, I feel like this reboot very much needs to stand on its own two feet, apart from the original Frasier series. At present, the characters surrounding Frasier seem a little too much of a novelty… too contrived, and not well-developed. The role of David Crane absolutely feels too silly, to “Disney-esque” to be taken at all seriously. I get where they’re going with that character, but it doesn’t work. I’m even questioning Kelsey’s ability to conjure up the spirit of Frasier once again. The characterization seems a bit off, which might be due to the lack of chemistry happening alongside the other characters. I’m nervous for this one, because, being such a huge fan of the original series AND Kelsey Grammer, I *really really really* want this to succeed.
It's normal that we're a little lost with the new characters. The same way, all these characters we learned to love (in the 90s Frasier) were new to us when that series started, it's the same thing with these new ones. Furthermore, it's impossible to feel close to all these new characters after only 2 episodes. If the main character moves across the country (from Seattle), you wouldn't see their friends, family and ex-coworkers hang at his place in Boston. Though it's a sequel, it's a little unfair to expect this show to pick up where the previous one ended. We got the chance to know and appreciate a superb cast on the original show. They grew on us. But it didn't happen in 2 episodes back then. After 30 years, it's not surprising that the humour feels different. This is a new and different show with new writers, new settings, new premise, with a different humour from 30 years ago. If someone approaches this new version of Frasier with the expectation of getting the same feeling as the 90's Frasier, they will be highly disappointed. If you want 90's Frasier, it's probably best to go watch the DVDs. I hope this sequel of Frasier finds its pace and brings us enjoyment with a character that first appeared in Cheers in 1984.
Sure, the show is a spinoff of the original, but being set 20 years later, you can't expect it to be the same. Frasier will always be Frasier, but now with a host of new characters, it is going to have a different feel. The new cast is really good and have already seemed to have "jelled". All the best to them!!! I think the show got a real firm footing in its first few episodes.
Well it's hard to judge from only 2 episodes but it does do the dramatic scenes pretty good and both episodes got 1 or 2 chuckles of me. It has a lot to live up to. Freddy seems lie he could sink the series at this point they're trying to make him a mini Martin but without the life experience he's coming more as smug But Martin was just less pretenous than his sons,
Yeah Freddie was defiantly the worst character in those two episodes. Very arrogant. Arrogance only works in comedies when the character is either funny or loveable. He has been neither so far
@@mikeysexton1166 I don't hate him (yet) but they seem to be trying to use him to replace Martin but Martin wasn't arrogant he was experienced with life and clashed with his sons elite lifestyles which are downplayed here.. Being a absent father is a good angle to take. The one scene I liked is one when he remembers sharing with Martin. So I'll wait for the entire season but Freddy is the character that needs to shine as he's the connection Frasier has. So he could sink the show. I hope he doesn't.
I want Ted Danson to come back. Sam and Frasier honestly had a well developed friendship due to both of their pasts with Diane. Having Sam and Frasier reunited and still single, they could do something really interesting with that dynamic in terms of aging… etc…
Unlike the other sequel series Paramount+ did with iCarly, this new series of Frasier does a great job (so far) capturing the magic from the OG series and doesn't spit in the audiences faces. And like some new things today in entertainment this show is not. It is not WOKE.
It doesn’t have the crispness, the snap. And Frasier is different too, maybe he’s playing him softer, more sympathetic. I don’t like the sets, it looks like an old show. I loved the old show and the old Frasier so much. The main problem as I see it is the changes in Frasier himself. I miss him.
The show feels “forced”. The intellectual comedy with genuine characters of the original is gone. It’s the Brittney Spears of entertainment. We were invested in Frasier’s well being for 11 yrs….and instead we got a 60 summary of the past 19 yrs of where his life had gone. It’s almost like the writers were on strike, drinking at the bar, and did a late night cram session to throw together a sitcom.😮
Siento que no es Freddy. Creo que la ya no estar Martín le cambiaron la personalidad para crear un conflicto, pero no se siente real. El Freddy de la serie original no es este que nos presentan. Y sabiendo quién es su madre, menos me lo creo.
To be honest this was never going to be as good as the original it was unrealistic to think that the original was a master piece I loved it and still watch hopefully this will get better but it’s best not to expect to much and just enjoy it
I disagree with his viewpoint. You can't compare the continuation with the original series because a person will always feel let down because the revival IS NOT the original. Please give it time. I personally liked it. I laughed more than i thought I would. The first two episodes are a great foundation for the revival series I am looking forward to watching the rest of the first season. my one minor reservation is the actor who plays David. I don't know if it's his acting or if it's just the personality of the character David he is playing but everytime he came on screen, his acting felt forced like he was overacting. I hope as the series goes on, he gets better. Overall a 8/10. I refuse to compare Frasier to the original series.
The scene where the reporter thought he killed his son was GENIUS! The series has always had good writing when it comes to misunderstandings between characters. I couldn’t stop laughing for a minute!
You misspelled "Freddy" as "David". Those two characters are cheap retooling of old Frasier characters. David Hyde Pierce won't reprise his role as Niles and John Mahoney is dead? No problem, just get David and Freddy to replay Niles and Martin! It is so obvious and so forced. The biggest mistake this show about psychiatrists makes is it ignores grief. Frasier gets dumped by Charlotte and moves back to Boston, but we only get one throw away line in the first episode about that? Eve's partner and father of her child is dead, but she never misses a beat as an unexpected single mother. She would be crying every three seconds from hormones alone, but did she even like the father of her child or was he just a sperm donor?
@@lenawagenfuehr53 What are you talking about? I spelled everything correctly. For me i liked it. However i understand alot of viewers are gonna disagree with me. I was pointing out that Chris' viewpoint about the series always has him reverting back and comparing it to the orginal. The revival is NOT the orginal. It needs time to cook. If a person compares it to the orginal they are always gonna be dissappointed with the revival.
The supporting characters in the original show were so important to add lots of different kinds of people for frasier to interact with and the comedy flowed from there. Fraiser by himself was never really that interesting, even in the final few episodes of the original run there were many fraiser centric episodes that felt a bit lacking, so surrounding him with strong characters is so important i think for him to work
I really enjoyed the first two episodes! The humor is off but its not the same writers plus the characters aren't the same but I appreciate the tribute they did for Marty Crane and revisiting the first episode of the original Frasier. Frasier got to see how his father felt when he moved back to Seattle and their relationship was strained. I hope it continues to be great but my only issue is the character David Crane. I don't know if they are going for that awkwardness that Niles had but this particular character isn't hitting it for me. Niles enhanced and complimented every scene he was in especially the scenes where he was by himself or just him and Frasier but David, not so much! I wanted to add that Kelsey Grammar is holding these two episodes and I agree with you just because we can do it doesn't mean it should be done!
Feels like everyone is acting and not reacting nicely like the original. Hoping they start to relax more as the season goes on. Thinking back of everything that happened in OG frasier the new frasier has a huuuuge mountain to climb
Agree with your reviews of episodes 1 and 2. The show seemed clumsy and off. And yes, I agree that the cast seemed more fit for a HIMYM-type of show... and I think that's one of the problems. Unlike the original series, the reboot's cast had no chemistry. Their performance comes across as too rehearsed. In comparison, David Hyde Pierce, Jane Leeves, John Mahoney, Peri Gilpin, fed off each other's vibe and their interactions with Kelsey Grammer seemed more natural and spontaneous. Almost, as if they weren't acting. The good news is that the show, at least for me, recovered some lost ground with episode 3 which felt more Frasier-like. We're slowly starting to appreciate the cast and understand their roles in the series. Maybe a bit of the old formula was thrown into the mix. Alan is the new Niles. Olivia feels more like Phoebe. Eve is like the new Daphne. But the path to success is clear...more Dr. Frasier Crane. At least for the first season. I'm looking forward to better episodes. As a "Craniac", I want this show to succeed.
Nothing will choke you up faster and make you tear up than seeing John Mahoney at the end of the first episode.😥
Before that, the flag scene made me choke up
YOU AINT KIDDING, IF EDDIE WAS ON HIS LAP..
That tag at the end hit me HARD! 😭
did he come back?
build a bridge!
The new series shouldn’t feel like the old show. He’s in a new setting and a new era. I think the show is good and looking forward to the new show.
I think it’s trash. The guy lives in the same town as the entire original cast of cheers. Yet has zero desire to see any of them. In fact he makes a joke in episode one saying that he spent too much time in that bar. It’s really character assassination. Going to that bar was never about the drinking it was about being with the people who congregated in that building. That is the central theme behind the finale episode of cheers being that Sam’s true love was being in that bar with those people. But Frasier acts like those people meant nothing to him in this reboot.
@@blankname6629 I agree. Maybe those actors didn't want to join or maybe they will later in the series. I didn't know how much I would like it since I LOVE Frasier and appreciate it more now that I am older. However watching the reboot was nice. Its not like the original but he is in a new setting with new characters. Some of the humor feel flat for me but that's because I can think about an older episode of Frasier and almost choke myself with laughter but that was a different era. Hopefully they won't do the same thing they did with Murphy Brown. LOL
@@didralamond8145 people keep saying it’s a new setting but it’s not. It’s literally the same town as cheers was in. I think it was a royal screw up to put it back in Boston.
@@blankname6629 I would have liked to see how his life would have been in Chicago! I wouldn't have mind to see how it would have been for him to be on TV! LOL Especially from the several episodes they had on the original Frasier where he would be on TV.
@@didralamond8145 I completely agree. I think that’s where this should have been set.
You nailed this one. I wrote a piece on it elsewhere, with some of those thoughts shared below.
A fatally flawed reboot. John Mahoney's absence is forgivable. He died. But replacing virtually the entire former cast with wan copies or worse, total departures that made the previous franchise such a smash is lethal.
First of all, has everyone forgotten that 'Freddie' as a child was the allergy-prone, sissified offspring. Somehow, he's morphed into a cleft-chinned firefighter with a roomie and a baby - the normal guy playing weekend daddy in this reboot with a marked 'stud' quality that would never have come from two people like Frasier and Lilith. In lieu of Niles, we get David - rebranded with much of the old Freddie's social hang-ups and shortcomings, but also, thinly, to be aping David Hyde Pierce without ever attaining the former's zestful joy for the obtuse one-liner.
What most of the new cast has utterly forgotten is that it isn't enough to recite a line written by some clever screen scribe. Much of the dialogue here has merit and occasional wit. But it's lost on actors who merely read back what's on the page. One could believe the original cast as real characters with those lines actually emanating from their lips. These guys are just hitting their talking points with shallowness.
The cast here, unlike the previous assemblage in the old show, lack the instantly endearing quality the old cast had in spades. There's not a one here who is as memorable. I kept hoping for this to get better. It hasn't. And Kelsey Grammar, while never in doubt as a consummate pro, has past his prime as the anxiety-riddled/socially inept, class-conscious intellectual that was so charmingly off beat in the original show.
Now, he's just an aged boor, so ensconced in his ways, he has an impossible time accepting that time has moved on. A real sad affair all around. I'll stick to my reruns of Cheers and the original Frasier. This reboot won't last. Not with this cast.
Again, As I said. It's not necessarily the writing. It's the actors. They know their lines but bring no personality to their parts. Sorry, but from day one, episode one, John Mahoney, Jane Leeves, Peri Gilpin and David Hyde Pierce each established themselves as anchors of that show in the same way the cast of Cheers became instantly recognizable and beloved. Shelly Long and Ted Danson could have read the phone book for an entire episode and it would have been amusing.
Few sitcoms instantly attain that level of recognizable success.
I can only think of one other from the eighties that immediately clicked so well - The Golden Girls. In the 90's it took Friends a good half first season to build upon the initial characters.
But the cast of the new Frasier have none of that staying power - none at all. There's no spark here.
Think about it. You could have taken Kelsey Grammer out of an episode of the original Frasier and the show would have still been endlessly watchable, thanks to the strong support. Even the 'extras' like Edward Hibbert's cheesy food critic, Gil Chesterton or Dan Butler's Bulldog were sustainable in Grammer's absence. They carried scenes.
Take Grammer out of even a brief scene in the new Frasier and it utterly falls flat and apart. If the producers want some advice, it's simple. Junk the reboot. Go back to the drawing board. Recast, and re-premiere. Get some faces that have personalities behind them. Every character on a sitcom needs to be 'a character'. You can't make it with just good-looking filler!
I can't agree with you more. I like the concept of the show, but its rehashing the same stuff from Frasier, like now its Frasiers turn to bond with his son. Honestly, if they were going to bring back Freddy, they should have brought the actor who played him, there is no replacing the original actor. I like the concept of Niles son but the actor who plays him is just so bad. They should have brought in an actor that could have the charm of Daphne but with Niles eccentric quirks. Another problem with the show is the setting. People won't mention it but honestly I just loved Frasiers old condo. The setting at the radio station felt alive. This new apartment of his feels cold and empty along with his classroom. If you ask me if they brought the original actor for Freddy and brought in a real good actor to play Niles son, then the focus should have been on them with Frasiers character coming to help, comfort or anything else. This new show feels like any other mediocre sitcom.
Wow. Normally I would write "TL;DR", but your eloquence really hits the nail on the head in what is wrong with this reboot. They really should have brought Trevor Einhorn back - I do not approve of this goy-washed Freddy.
Totally agree!
I feel this series (so far, of course) has the soul of Frasier as we knew it - personality conflict, friendship, and a touch of classism. My main gripe with the show is how “Chuck Lorre” it feels; from the lighting, acting, set design, and production overall. Frasier had class, in both senses. This series is struggling to maintain that so far. But hey, it’s Frasier, I am a diehard fan, even went to Kerry Park in Seattle just to see Frasier’s apartment view in person. I am just happy to have more Frasier.
I was hoping to see more reviews on this show, but Im glad we got this one! I liked them, but both episodes definitely had a different vibe to it. It feels "modern," which is fine, but the original had a classiness to it. New sitcoms just don't have the same feel anymore. Maybe its because there's so many now
I agree! I wish more people were talking about this reboot or spin off whatever they want to call it. It has this modern vibe which is good but for this style of sit-com I wouldn't mind the older way but they want to appeal to a newer audience.
Most of todays sitcoms are crude and vulgar. This Fraser revival is witty and charming; not modern in that sense of the word and that's refreshing to say the least.
Yeah, they should have left it alone. It was perfection!
You literally said every single point i think about this series as well. As a die hard fan of the first 11 seasons… i hate to be pessimistic but its pretty much impossible to replace Martin and Niles . Some of the others like roz and daphne i prob could let someone else sub in for their roles in the new one but Niles and Martin are genuinely irreplaceable. Their magic is missing.I will watch to the end of the series and i hope my opinion is changed but this is definitely like drinking a bottle of flat coke .. your drinking it and every so often looking at the bottle and swirling it round hoping to taste what you were used to but after a few gulps you throw it out. We live in hope. Great review mate keep up the good work.
I do agree, I feel like they're trying too hard. If you go back and look at the first episode of the original show, there's a lovely foil for Frasier in Niles, who is a distinct personality, we meet his dad, who has a distinct personality... and so on. In this show, no one seems to have any real distinct personality, and no one is a foil for Frasier. Another issue is Frasier's lack of a life. In the old show, he was DOING things. He had his JOB, he had his relationship and coffee with Niles, and so on. Here, he seems kind of aimless.
The biggest issue is, though, the writing. That very first scene had my eyes rolling. In walks Frasier, and he's greeted by someone we don't know like an old friend, as if we SHOULD know him. They have an awkward exchange about looking good... then stall, and start over. In comes Niles' son, and he's immediately rambling about taking sleeping pills and drinking coffee and then he passes out standing up, and suddenly wakes up... It's really bad to set up a joke and then IMMEDIATELY cash in on it. It was just so contrived. THEN we have the old friend talking about a goof in his class who fell down... which he describes in great detail, apparently never realizing the goofball is standing next to him... something I realized before he was more than three words into his story. Again, just so contrived... and this is just the first scene. Just trying SO, SO hard. The first scene of the old show was witty and clever. This one seems banal and cringy.
I loved the old show, but I'm not impressed by what I've seen so far of this one.
Though, I did love the tribute to John Mahoney at the end. I do understand David Hyde Pierce's decision to not return to Niles, but a brief cameo to say goodbye to his son, his brother and his father might have been nice.
💯
I understand it will be strange for those that watched the old series and miss the original cast. However for many of us who were introduced to Frasier in Cheers, we had the same feelings when Frasier first aired. I enjoyed the first two episodes, there is only one actor that feels like the generic modern sitcom performance.
Do tell… which character?
I find it a bit peculiar how you were aware in advance that Frasier would be the only returning main character and you still protest the new characters. You mention you don’t know these guys and they’re unfamiliar, but isn’t that the point of new characters? They’ll make themselves familiar as the series progresses. Kelsey Grammer’s portrayal of Frasier truly is the heart and soul of the original series and the new one; as long as Dr. Frasier Crane is still Dr. Frasier Crane, his friends around him will adhere to everything he built in the mid 90s.
It was in all the press only Frasier was returning. As to the new characters, wow are they poorly written and nothing but over used tropes - it's a steaming pile of unfunny - a HUGE steaming pile
I watched the two episodes, and was glad to see Kelsey. I did laugh and I did smile.
My only criticism - And I had the same view before I watched the episodes - Is that they changed Freddy as a character.
It is not realistic, and not entirely believable. They did so because they wanted someone to represent Martin in the new season.
Absolutely agree, I am not feeling Freddy’s development. The other cast is ok minus the roommate🫣 I have already forgotten her name.
I watched the first episode and I liked it, I found myself laughing several times.
I am glad to see Frasier again after all these years.Watched the first 2 episodes but we need to wait how they will built on the story and the new characters, also i am pretty sure old characters will pop in from time to time so lets wait and see
“Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should”
A nightmare on elm street 2010.
Friday the 13th 2009
Anything after child’s play 3,
Hellraiser 3
I know i know, unpopular opinion
I quite enjoyed the second episode, first took a while to warm up. The line about Bulldog's Ave Maria made me laugh
I want a flashback to that funeral.
I didn't expect to be equal or even similar to the original, but the Frasier character is so fun and Grammer portrays him with such passion that I will definitely give this series more than a couple of chances.
uh no
I’m not sure why you would expect it to be similar to the original Frazier. Many years have passed and he moved back to Boston. I would expect that things would be very different. I like it. Give it time and stop comparing the show that lasted many seasons to one that only showed two episodes. A lot of times the first two episodes set the stage and give a lot of info on the past.
You know, when Frasier originally came out, people complained that it was nothing like Cheers (in fact, there were critics who said the writing was bad just because it retconned some facts about Frasier that were established on Cheers), and while this is more connected to the original Frasier than Frasier itself was to Cheers, it still can't be the same show. Even if you had the same cast, it wouldn't be the same show, because it's in a different time and there are natually different writers and different circumstances. So, no, I don't think this was ever going to be like the original Frasier, and this show is currently at a huge disadvantage because there are only two episodes and we've had 20 to 30 years with the episodes of the original Frasier, so I think we should give this a chance (and this is coming from someone who adores the original Frasier and will re-watch any episode).
Yeah, but they totally got Frederick wrong. No way Lilith would ever let her son drop out of Harvard to become a fireman
@@lenawagenfuehr53 I don't know, as overbearing as she was, Lilith wasn't the most present parent, and I can totally buy her washing her hands of him when he decides to drop out of Harvard... I also completely buy that with such an overbearing mother and absentee father, Freddy would end up taking more after his grandfather, the person who listened to him the most...
@@lenawagenfuehr53 I wasn't a fan of Freddie atall in this. He seemed abit arrogant without many redeeming qualities in his personality. Just felt like a generic sitcom character.
No kidding. Total miscasting. As a boy, Freddie, in the original Frasier was a child so inept at any physical activity, and so into intellectual pursuits, there is NO WAY he ever grew up to be a rugged fireman. And stock character doesn't begin to describe the way the rest of the cast fits into their nondescript roles.@@mikeysexton1166
I agree with your sentiments. Kelsey feels just like current day Frasier and the nephew is great. I also like the jaded Professor friend. The remainder feel like they’re in a different comedy show. Also disappointed the original son is not in this and had assumed he was no longer acting, especially without the other originals, it would have been nice to have him in this.
I've binge watched the original series several times, one of my favorites shows of all time. For the most part I really enjoyed the first two episodes of this reboot. Except once thing. David. I actually thought David was terrible.
He was not funny, just an idiot. Yes, he is clumsy like Niles, but that's it. Niles was pretentious, clever, and smart. David is a kiss ass to Frasier, he reminds me of Jar Jar from Star Wars.
This felt exactly like HIMYF. It has the same “sterile” vibe.
Spot on mate. Started watching it. 20-minutes and turned it off what a pile of rubbish, 😁
I watched the first episode and laughed all the way through. No LOLs but lots of chuckle laughs. I'd watch more of this.
I had a few LOLs - one that comes to mind was when David let go of the dresser he and Freddie were carrying, then turned around to ask Freddy, “There’s catnip for women?”
Aww, I watched this series with my dad too in high school. Olivia and David were a bit much for me. Kelsey is great and the other characters show promise for me. Dialogue was pretty good in my opinion and reminded me of the old series especially Fraser’s. I really could have done without the Olivia drooling over Freddie bit (it came out of no where for her character and was so awkward).
I thought it was mildly entertaining, but I felt that the jokes were flat & a lot of the characters were genetic. The dialogue lacked the wit & sparkle of the original, & the show lacked the Wodehousian touches in the original. I always enjoyed the type of stories where Frasier & Niles would get involved in an imbroglio & their plans would go awry. The joke was was on them, but with Martin to take them down a peg or two & remind them of what’s what, there was a humility to them. They were loveably pompous. That’s what I find lacking from the new series, but since it takes a lot of series a while to hit their straps, I’m willing to give it a go & stick with it.
You mean generic, and yes, a lot of the characters and jokes feel forced. I don't buy the Freddy character at all, nor any of his friends. Eve lost her partner and is a single mother to a young baby - she is waaay too upbeat and happy. She'd be a pile of hormones and grief in real life. Really bad writing.
@@lenawagenfuehr53 I did mean generic. Thanks for pointing it out - stupid auto. I totally agree with what you said. It wasn’t just that the supporting characters were not funny; they didn’t ring true. Even though Freddy explained why he kept his living arrangement a secret from Frasier, I just didn’t buy it. You’re right: it’s bad writing. I hope that when Lilith enters the fray, things pick up.
just finished 2 episodes and brought me to tears as a parent of 30somethings who disregard their parents who tried to give them everything they never had only to be treated with disregard for a period of time...brought me to tears! there is NOTHING good coming from Hollyweed...except new Frasier!! God bless yas!
Frasier and Home Improvement. What a combo. Loved them both growing up. Great video btw.
I would say, I did enjoy the first two episodes. I get what you're saying about the bland vibes. I felt things got better as they went on but I do think the secondary characters in Frasier (Niles, Daphne etc. are really what made it shine).
I also think the apartment setting in the original series felt a lot more like a real apartment. All of the current sets scream "set" to me.
All being said, I'll be watching every episode this season and I'll hold off on final judgement until the end.
I watched the first couple of episodes and my heart sank and I started to feel nauseous. I thought I'll stick with it and watch the 3rd episode I couldn't finish it. It was truly awful. The canned laughter mixed with the studio audience grates on you and the replacement actors have zero presence. I feel as if Frasier is staring in somone elses sitcom. I just cannot get over how bad this is. Rest in peace Frasier we loved you!
I just watched the first two episodes as well, and it wasn't too bad all things considered. I grew up watching Frasier and later Cheers over and over again. They are both two of my favorite comfort shows of all time. I did know that Martin wouldn't be returning because I knew that Mahoney was dead, but I didn't know Niles, Daphne, or Roz wouldn't be coming back. I was really hoping to see them. I agree the humor felt very "off". But it just felt like a 2020's show. I think almost all shows since the late 2010s have felt "off" and awkward in a strange way. Almost like imposters. I do, however, think Frasier was pretty well performed by Grammer. He felt like frasier, still, but some of his lines felt wrong. Not Grammer's fault. The end of episode one was rather heartfelt, and it was bittersweet seeing and hearing Martin for one more line at the end.
Agreed. Some lines were really perplexing choices. I’m not a fan of it so far.
I watched both episodes, and I feel like the script was written by Taylor Swift. The humour is quite obvious and telegraphed. And the context is too with the perceived class divide and Chaplin gags and people walk in and out like it is Friends. It is missing the set piece of the big apartment as well. I like Lyndhurst but he seems a bit subdued like he is under a gag order or something.
I was delightfully surprised how much I enjoyed the first two episodes of this reboot. Frasier’s character is still so true and I think we just need a few more episodes for the other characters to have a chance to develop more. I really like the nephew character and I think he could be a favourite on the show. It’s unfair to expect the show to be just like it was before. So far, I think it’s a good update and I love that’s it’s a progression of the story.
I agree with you so much on this show it feels so empty like it's star but it's not the reason Frasier was so great back in the 90's was cuz it's cast was great Frasier didn't have to carry the ball every night like it feels he has to in this series...this series I don't feel is going to work very well
i liked the show a lot. it's just starting, you have to give it more than two episodes. 😂
Spot on! All the best lines went to Frasier. Hopefully it gets better going forward:)
I expected the original Freddy actor but got over it in the first couple minutes. Can’t wait to see more scenes with the stuffy professor friend in the classroom (and pub). David is hilariously like Niles - LOVE how he looks up to, and respects his ‘famous’ Uncle Frasier.
One complaint (literally, one). *In what universe is that Fraser Crane’s apartment???*
I understand he just purchased the building and moved in so I’ll cut him some slack, but he better call in the contractors, and quick!
seriously you didn't laugh at the Bulldog ava marie joke?
I howled at that one lol. Rewinded the show a couple of times just to hear the joke, again.
it shows there's at least potential with this show. the fact Martin planned it and I can see Frasier and Niles fight about it shows how good the original was. this series does the dramatic stuff good i'll give it that.@@MalabarTheGreat
If the reboot tries to duplicate the humor of the OG Frasier, playing off Frasier’s pomposity with David playing a mini-Niles - I am not sure if I will continue watching. I honestly did not have one LOL moment in the reboot pilot, whereas I had many in each OG series episode - but I did shed a tear seeing Frasier & Freddy talked about Martin. If the reboot takes different angle, a more serious & dramatic tone - family, teaching - with a touch of Frasier’s humor I think there would be a good I will continue watching. Recall how Ed Asner went from being funny in MTM to a serious Lou Grant, it was a brilliant evolution of Lou. But episode 1 & 2 seemed to rely on Frasier's elevated personality looking down on the common people for laughs - I'm not optimistic initially. Take it this way, the Pilot of Lou Grant and the Mandalorian immediately caught my attention as something very different and compelling compared to the previous MTM and Star Wars episodes - not a regurgitation of the past.
I like it so far. I can see it lasting a few seasons. I hope they dont run the show dry though. Good quality over quantity and then wrap up the series.
The 9ther character that is sorely missed is Eddie. Getting another pet to be Frasier's "nemesis" could help the show, although Moose and Enzo couldn't be replaced
I agree frasier character is still spot on. Give the ensemble time to blend. I loved first show. Shows promise.
For me it’s Frasier, Seinfeld, and Cheers
Somethings weird though. It seems more like a play or skit Not sure if they used filters or something on the previous show but when watching the new one it's doesn't seem like a tv show. Also felt like they were trying to hard to make it funny...
I enjoyed both episodes ❤
As did I.
who's to say old characters won't or can't make a cameo or reappearance because it isn't beyond of realms of possibility just to write them in and you don't reveal your entire hand yet. this could be a slow burner to become its own humour.
David is like Nile’s !!!!! Great 2 episode
It's basically saying Frasier...left Seattle...moved to Chicago and became Oprah...then moved back to Boston where Lilith has raised a sports fanatic son. But besides that...
I'd take the Frasier style humor over HIMYM any time.
Our biggest gripe is that cbs making us wait until october 17th to show the episodes!
I agree with your comments, great review. I do enjoy Frasier, the early seasons especially they were very fun. The chemistry between Frasier and his quite particular brother was very fun to watch. The romance with Daphne was also well written. I do hope, like you, I believe, that the new characters will bloom. The university director role has potential. I am quite impressed by Kelsey Grammer attempting this feat to, in essence revive a classic. I sincerely hope that he has the humility to understand that, like you put it so very well in your review, his role must not be at the forefront all of the time. It's like a dance and sometime making your partner look good, steals the show and everyone is looking... At you.
The pilot gave me a lot to like. Kelsey is always great as Frasier and it’s like no time has passed at all for the character. I also really like Alan. His type of droll humor fits in perfectly with the type of humor Frasier has always been known for. I also really like the tribute to Martin. It was tasteful. It was respectful. It fully captured the person Martin was and it was a very human and understandable reason as to why Freddie didn’t want to say goodbye. It was a beautiful moment between him and Frasier. When Freddie said “I miss him” I believed it because I too miss Martin and it was a beautiful tribute to him and the type of seriousness Frasier was known for. The pilot was a good start.
Unfortunately, the pilot was a fluke and I have enjoyed very little since then.
I love Frasier.
If it comes out on dvd that would be great
Was not the original show also Frazier focused the first couple of episodes and slowly started to focus more on the rest of the characters. He is in Boston so how will they explain him not going to Cheers for some suds.
Between Frasier and Home Improvement, that pretty much runs the entire gamut of styles of masculinity.
Bulldog in frasier is like newman in seinfeld, he is that extra unofficial member of the series
They mentioned he did a song at Martin's funeral. They ran out of things for Bulldog to do in Frasier, and quietly wrote him out...I don't see him turning up in Boston
@@lenawagenfuehr53 I'm not surprised bulldog won't be in it, all the original characters won't be there
Kelsey as Frasier continues to be spot on....the problem is the rest of the characters. Maybe it's too early but the chemistry is just not there...but it's not that bad and I would watch again.
I miss the time where tv shows got a fair chance to grow into what they'd eventually become. These days, everyone's a critic and if a series doesn't hit the ground running they're a goner even before they got a fair chance.
Nah, I disagree. I thought there were several decent laughs throughout both episodes. The John Mahoney tribute was a perfect moment.
David Hyde-Pierce and John Mahoney were lightning in a bottle and that may not happen with any of these new characters but it doesn’t mean this show won’t be worthwhile.
You know, when the original Frasier started, I’m sure people who were used to see him in Cheers were a bit put off at first by the lack of people from Cheers and all the new characters. I wasn’t charmed 100% by the first episode but I think we need to watch a few episodes to have a real taste of this new version of Frasier. I think the type of humour is not quite as witty as in the original series but again there might be some adjustments in the next few weeks. I’m gonna give it a chance because it’s new and obviously it’ll be a bit different and we need to get used to that first, before we can really appreciate what it’s attempting to do.
It’s not as witty I watched episode one and didn’t laugh once. It feels like a cheap knockoff of the original. It would have made a lot more sense to not cast this in Boston. Doing that makes you wonder why he does not go see his old pals at cheers. The bar closed but most of the people stayed in that town.
@@blankname6629 Same here, I was so disappointed but the 2nd one got the ball rolling. I'm looking forward to more.
I loved the original from the first episode but this is truly awful. It's worse than I thought it would be and the locations are so depressing. The replacement actors have zero presence. They made a really bad choice. Could not even make it to the end of the 3rd episode the canned laughter mixed in with the studio audience grates on you. All I can say is rest in peace Frasier.
They should have left well enough alone because Frasier ended at the right time with all of the characters moving on with their lives, Frasier seems incomplete and slightly lost without Niles and Daphne and the other characters and the new ones simply dont work so I don't think I'll be watching anymore episode's,
Good review, K.G is terrific but a weak supporting cast especially the guy who plays his son.
Didn't know what to expect from your review, but have to say I agree with you one hundred percent - and it makes me sad to say so. These first two episodes were as you say: insipid, bland and uninspired with the exception of Kelsey's performance of Frasier. Gotta wonder if missing parts of the original - including all those whacky calls coming in to Frasier's radio show for both he and Roz to react to - will keep this from coming anywhere near the comedic genius of before. Freddy seems both miscast and poorly written and the character of David is merely a hint of either of his parents, even given that he delivered a couple of the better lines. And its a smalll thing, but definitely noticeable: Frasier's new place has no resemblance to the high level of taste evidenced in Frasier's home in Seattle. I sure was looking forward to the show but now simply don't care.
I think we need to give the show a chance to develop and to grow on us. While this is a “continuation” of the old Frasier - but it isn’t. So let’s enjoy it and let it grow.
The irony is that this review could easily been done right after the Frasier Season One premiere..!
Move to the other side of the country?
NO reference to the previous (beloved) show?
The tonal shift between the Cheers finale and Frasier premiere?
😊
I don't know why, but my biggest gripes were the sets and both of the girl characters. The sets look cheap, both literally and for the characters in the show. I really have trouble believing Frasier would live in that building, whether he bought it or not. The girls were just annoying and had no unique personality quirks like Ros or Daphne had.
Well said - spot on!
Eve is supposed to be a woman who is unexpectedly a single mom after her partner was killed - she shows no sign of grief or post partum hormones. Do they have any women in the writers room? I read that Meryl Streep stepped in and re-wrote a speech her character was supposed to give in Kramer vs Kramer - she won an Oscar. Someone needs to do the same with every line Eve is supposed to say.
I love the original Frasier & watch it on DVD regularly. How I met your mother is my worst nightmare of a show.
I don't think it's fair to compare the first 2 episodes to peak frasier. Sitcoms take a bit of time to get the characters in their groove. I was happily surprised by how much I enjoyed the first 2 episodes (might be better than some of the late series episodes)
I only watched a few clips since I don't have Paramount+, and the new humor falls flat for a Fraiser revival.
Feels like a fish out of water story with a lack of the smart humor the original had. I expected Frasier, but got Young Sheldon from what I saw.
I mean Frederick should still have some of the class for being the son of Lilith and Frasier but acts like an average Joe. I understand if he didn't follow their lifestyle, but even Lilith would have him growing up to be honest and respectful with his family.
I think if we had RUclips fans reviewing the original series they would be disappointed it wasn’t Cheers. I enjoyed the first episode
Facts.
The main problem isn't the dynamic, Frasier is best when he's bouncing off of anyone, and Grammer kept that aspect true to form....however its the blatant suspense of disbelief moment that the writers requires you take in for little quips and or gags. Like Frasier not knowing anything about Baseball.....when in fact, he was best friends with Sam....who played on the fucking Socks. Or how they shoehorn in Alan, who Frasier apparently knew for decades in Boston. Its a slap in the face to the fans who paid attention.
I'm with Pierce on this one, there's nothing left for him to do, I'd also add, there's nothing left for Frasier to do...its the same comedic beats, the low hanging fruit of common psychological tropes that somehow can't figure out, and of course, the baby gag. The show just feels like Grammer wanted to make everyone laugh again, which is fine, but do so with respect to your own ethos. And that's honestly how I feel about it the show so far....So much low hanging fruit, you can smell the member berries.
5.5 out 10 (For now).
Enjoyed your perspective on the new Frasier. My main gripe was Niles isn’t on the show. I don’t mind new characters on a new show it comes with the territory but Niles being there with Frasier would have added more gravitas to the new Frasier show and helped anchor the comedy as a comedy duo project. I always thought of the original as a buddy comedy with Frasier and Niles. But also if you exclude Nile’s for the sake of argument not having any other returning characters like a Roz for example it turns into a soft reboot of original Frasier. Doesn’t exactly subvert my expectations, everything being a soft reboot nowadays doesn’t help the concept.
Frasier 🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
I love this show. I was a passing fan of the original show. I ended up watching the final season of Frasier and I think the spin-off flows nicely. I laughed out loud watching this show.
It's normal that we're a little lost with the new characters. Frasier moved across the country back to Boston. The same way, all these characters we learned to love (in the 90s Frasier were new to us when that series started). It's impossible to feel close to all these new characters after only 2 episodes. Furthermore, if someone moves across the country, you wouldn't see his friends from his old work place stopping by all the time.
It's a little unfair to expect this show to pick up where the previous one ended.
We got the chance to know and appreciate a superb cast on the original show. But it didn't happen in 2 episodes back then
The other characters needs to win a spot in the series. Don't hate the new Frasier for choosing that way.
A new town/city means also new characters.
Yes we still love the old Frasier show, I think that was and still the best comedy sitcom beside The Golden Girls!
Hopefully, we can enjoy the new Frasier show like we all did...
I have only seen the first episode, but I wouldn't call it "soulless" at this point. It does lack a certain spark with its humour, though. You're never going to replicate the humour from the original show, unless you get the original writers to return. It's just never going to happen. One line stood out to me when comparing/contrasting the humour, and it was when Frasier says, "This is bad sherry." It's a line that could've had an excellent punch from Grammer had it been something completely different. Instead, it's just an obvious poke at the quality of the drink. It's too obvious. There's no subtlety there.
Still, the episode was fine enough. I appreciated some aspects of it. There were a few touching moments, which I always appreciate. The heartfelt moments felt more appropriate than the humour, which means the show isn't delivering the laughs. But maybe that'll change. One final thing I definitely didn't like was the dismissal of Frasier's relationship with Charlotte. I didn't even think they'd mention her, so I was surprised when they had. However, they dismissed that entire plot point in one line. They constructed the entire conclusion of Frasier's arc from the original series to hinge on that relationship, and whether or not it was going to work out in Chicago. For it all to be thrown aside with one line for laughs was a massive disappointment for me. I get that they don't want to explain all of it and whatnot, but they could've treated that a lot better. The first episode loses major points for me with that.
We'll see how the rest goes...
What you said about feeling like the Frasier character being sort of “lost in a sea of unfamiliar characters” totally resonates with me. I just finished the pilot episode, and feel like it’s missing something. It’s missing the chemistry between characters we saw right from the beginning in the original series. Since we can’t have any of the other characters from the original series, I feel like this reboot very much needs to stand on its own two feet, apart from the original Frasier series. At present, the characters surrounding Frasier seem a little too much of a novelty… too contrived, and not well-developed. The role of David Crane absolutely feels too silly, to “Disney-esque” to be taken at all seriously. I get where they’re going with that character, but it doesn’t work. I’m even questioning Kelsey’s ability to conjure up the spirit of Frasier once again. The characterization seems a bit off, which might be due to the lack of chemistry happening alongside the other characters. I’m nervous for this one, because, being such a huge fan of the original series AND Kelsey Grammer, I *really really really* want this to succeed.
It's normal that we're a little lost with the new characters. The same way, all these characters we learned to love (in the 90s Frasier) were new to us when that series started, it's the same thing with these new ones.
Furthermore, it's impossible to feel close to all these new characters after only 2 episodes.
If the main character moves across the country (from Seattle), you wouldn't see their friends, family and ex-coworkers hang at his place in Boston.
Though it's a sequel, it's a little unfair to expect this show to pick up where the previous one ended. We got the chance to know and appreciate a superb cast on the original show. They grew on us. But it didn't happen in 2 episodes back then.
After 30 years, it's not surprising that the humour feels different. This is a new and different show with new writers, new settings, new premise, with a different humour from 30 years ago.
If someone approaches this new version of Frasier with the expectation of getting the same feeling as the 90's Frasier, they will be highly disappointed. If you want 90's Frasier, it's probably best to go watch the DVDs.
I hope this sequel of Frasier finds its pace and brings us enjoyment with a character that first appeared in Cheers in 1984.
Exactly how I felt about it.. but it is definitely giving off a nicholodeon production feel. I guess they are trying to appeal to a younger audience
Sure, the show is a spinoff of the original, but being set 20 years later, you can't expect it to be the same. Frasier will always be Frasier, but now with a host of new characters, it is going to have a different feel. The new cast is really good and have already seemed to have "jelled". All the best to them!!! I think the show got a real firm footing in its first few episodes.
Well it's hard to judge from only 2 episodes but it does do the dramatic scenes pretty good and both episodes got 1 or 2 chuckles of me. It has a lot to live up to.
Freddy seems lie he could sink the series at this point they're trying to make him a mini Martin but without the life experience he's coming more as smug But Martin was just less pretenous than his sons,
Yeah Freddie was defiantly the worst character in those two episodes. Very arrogant. Arrogance only works in comedies when the character is either funny or loveable. He has been neither so far
@@mikeysexton1166 I don't hate him (yet) but they seem to be trying to use him to replace Martin but Martin wasn't arrogant he was experienced with life and clashed with his sons elite lifestyles which are downplayed here.. Being a absent father is a good angle to take. The one scene I liked is one when he remembers sharing with Martin. So I'll wait for the entire season but Freddy is the character that needs to shine as he's the connection Frasier has. So he could sink the show. I hope he doesn't.
I want Ted Danson to come back. Sam and Frasier honestly had a well developed friendship due to both of their pasts with Diane. Having Sam and Frasier reunited and still single, they could do something really interesting with that dynamic in terms of aging… etc…
Unlike the other sequel series Paramount+ did with iCarly, this new series of Frasier does a great job (so far) capturing the magic from the OG series and doesn't spit in the audiences faces. And like some new things today in entertainment this show is not. It is not WOKE.
It doesn’t have the crispness, the snap. And Frasier is different too, maybe he’s playing him softer, more sympathetic. I don’t like the sets, it looks like an old show.
I loved the old show and the old Frasier so much. The main problem as I see it is the changes in Frasier himself. I miss him.
The show feels “forced”. The intellectual comedy with genuine characters of the original is gone. It’s the Brittney Spears of entertainment. We were invested in Frasier’s well being for 11 yrs….and instead we got a 60 summary of the past 19 yrs of where his life had gone. It’s almost like the writers were on strike, drinking at the bar, and did a late night cram session to throw together a sitcom.😮
I liked it some flaws lookin forward to rest
Since the new series is set in Boston, I wonder if we might see Sam, Norm, or Cliff (from Cheers).
I like it so far. It's just the beginning and I'll give the new characters a chance.
I liked it. It feels right not like how I met your father that was tarbel just tarbel and disappointing
I LOVE IT..WELCOME BACK.!
Personally, I think the guy who plays Fredde should be removed.
Siento que no es Freddy. Creo que la ya no estar Martín le cambiaron la personalidad para crear un conflicto, pero no se siente real. El Freddy de la serie original no es este que nos presentan. Y sabiendo quién es su madre, menos me lo creo.
Spot on review
To be honest this was never going to be as good as the original it was unrealistic to think that the original was a master piece I loved it and still watch hopefully this will get better but it’s best not to expect to much and just enjoy it
I disagree with his viewpoint. You can't compare the continuation with the original series because a person will always feel let down because the revival IS NOT the original. Please give it time. I personally liked it. I laughed more than i thought I would. The first two episodes are a great foundation for the revival series I am looking forward to watching the rest of the first season. my one minor reservation is the actor who plays David. I don't know if it's his acting or if it's just the personality of the character David he is playing but everytime he came on screen, his acting felt forced like he was overacting. I hope as the series goes on, he gets better. Overall a 8/10. I refuse to compare Frasier to the original series.
The scene where the reporter thought he killed his son was GENIUS!
The series has always had good writing when it comes to misunderstandings between characters. I couldn’t stop laughing for a minute!
You misspelled "Freddy" as "David". Those two characters are cheap retooling of old Frasier characters. David Hyde Pierce won't reprise his role as Niles and John Mahoney is dead? No problem, just get David and Freddy to replay Niles and Martin! It is so obvious and so forced. The biggest mistake this show about psychiatrists makes is it ignores grief. Frasier gets dumped by Charlotte and moves back to Boston, but we only get one throw away line in the first episode about that? Eve's partner and father of her child is dead, but she never misses a beat as an unexpected single mother. She would be crying every three seconds from hormones alone, but did she even like the father of her child or was he just a sperm donor?
@@lenawagenfuehr53 What are you talking about? I spelled everything correctly. For me i liked it. However i understand alot of viewers are gonna disagree with me. I was pointing out that Chris' viewpoint about the series always has him reverting back and comparing it to the orginal. The revival is NOT the orginal. It needs time to cook. If a person compares it to the orginal they are always gonna be dissappointed with the revival.
@@ksaraf23it reminded me of the Frasier Halloween episode where all the kids in the building thought Frasier ate kids' brains... 😳🤣🍻
well the next episodes also air on cbs?
The supporting characters in the original show were so important to add lots of different kinds of people for frasier to interact with and the comedy flowed from there. Fraiser by himself was never really that interesting, even in the final few episodes of the original run there were many fraiser centric episodes that felt a bit lacking, so surrounding him with strong characters is so important i think for him to work
I really enjoyed the first two episodes! The humor is off but its not the same writers plus the characters aren't the same but I appreciate the tribute they did for Marty Crane and revisiting the first episode of the original Frasier. Frasier got to see how his father felt when he moved back to Seattle and their relationship was strained.
I hope it continues to be great but my only issue is the character David Crane. I don't know if they are going for that awkwardness that Niles had but this particular character isn't hitting it for me. Niles enhanced and complimented every scene he was in especially the scenes where he was by himself or just him and Frasier but David, not so much!
I wanted to add that Kelsey Grammar is holding these two episodes and I agree with you just because we can do it doesn't mean it should be done!
Feels like everyone is acting and not reacting nicely like the original. Hoping they start to relax more as the season goes on. Thinking back of everything that happened in OG frasier the new frasier has a huuuuge mountain to climb
Agree with your reviews of episodes 1 and 2. The show seemed clumsy and off. And yes, I agree that the cast seemed more fit for a HIMYM-type of show... and I think that's one of the problems. Unlike the original series, the reboot's cast had no chemistry. Their performance comes across as too rehearsed. In comparison, David Hyde Pierce, Jane Leeves, John Mahoney, Peri Gilpin, fed off each other's vibe and their interactions with Kelsey Grammer seemed more natural and spontaneous. Almost, as if they weren't acting.
The good news is that the show, at least for me, recovered some lost ground with episode 3 which felt more Frasier-like. We're slowly starting to appreciate the cast and understand their roles in the series. Maybe a bit of the old formula was thrown into the mix. Alan is the new Niles. Olivia feels more like Phoebe. Eve is like the new Daphne. But the path to success is clear...more Dr. Frasier Crane. At least for the first season.
I'm looking forward to better episodes. As a "Craniac", I want this show to succeed.
There was no Phoebe in Frasier. Olivia is clearly Roz - a man-eater and hugely competitive with a more successful sister.
I think I got Frasier's talent manager's name wrong. I think it was Bebe(?) not Phoebe.
D.H.P would be so welcome on this show.