Do you like the Frasier sequel? Join our PATREON to unlock our Members-Only Series “Total Take," vote on what we cover next, and earn more exciting perks: www.patreon.com/thetake
Let this show find its own voice. This is not that Fraser from the 90s. This is Fraser who is 20 years older and 20 years different. I'm willing to let this show cook. I'm excited to see how this new show moves forward in time.
90s Frasier was almost perfect. In my eyes: if something is that good that stood the test of time, it doesn't need to be continued/rebooted/sequel/prequel/ whatever. I don't care for this one. Don't need to. Old frasier still sits well and is still rewatchable today.
I think it's really good so far, well directed and there's lots of room for the writers and cast to hit their stride even more. Whenever I rewatch the original pilot for the first one, I'm always amazed at how incredibly good it is across the board and how rare that is.
A chess match with his father revealed a connection between the two that was easily missed. His dad beat Frasier time after time. When he expressed his frustration to his dad, Martin pointed out that chess was similar to detective work in its demand for anticipation, strategy, and cunning. In other words, Frasier and Niles inherited a good deal of their intelligence from their dad, who was a very sharp man. The two sons made the mistake of confusing culture with intelligence. Always thought that was one of the best scenes in the whole series with a lesson that is worth incorporating into real life.
What you said was spot on , my favorite episode was two , Frasier and Niles trying to run a restaurant that was hilarious and that episode where the newspaper salesman hates Frasier and frasier is trying to find out why , it was my favorite because I have a twin brother and my father is a lot like Frasier , we are like Martin crane , me and my brother when we were young would always try to start something and my dad would walk in the room and would say it wont work , and how he explained it was identical to how Martin explained to Frasier , and that episode where the newspaper guy (Tony Shaloub) hated him what was funny was Frasier wanted to be liked by someone so badly he ended up destroying the man's livelihood
Remember when Niles was pretending to be Daphne’s husband in front of her old boyfriend? Frazier told Martin he had to leave because he was not clever enough to play along. Then Martin said he was an astronaut? It’s like Frazier was always surprised that his dad was as sharp as a tack.
The problem with this reboot is not that it's bad, it's not. The problem is that it is not great. 'Great' was the bar set by Frasier, which means anything less than this falls short.
Agreed. I feel like it could potentially get there, but it's gonna need some time to marinate. Find it's feet. It's not far off either. I actually enjoyed the whole season, though i could see where it fell short in a few areas. But with some time, I'm sure it's going to be fine.
I'll flat out say, today's generation of writers seem to create based off imitating, and that is a fundamental problem right there. Imitation is why so many of these nostalgia products feel fake.
I don't think it's the writers, I think it's the studio heads ordering them to do that. They know "formula y" has worked in the past, so it's a safer bet to go with that rather than risk money on an original formula. Just see all of Disney's live-action remakes as one of the worst examples.
It’s puzzling that so many are willing to point the finger at writers (really? as if they’re given full creative control?) and not at the network and studio heads that own the intellectual property and hire a committee of staff writers to churn out reboots and sequels and prequels. Isn’t it obvious that rebooting Frasier is a cynical business decision? It’s not like hard up Hollywood writers are going door to door pitching spec scripts for a Frasier reboot out of a burning passion for the series😂
@@jabrokneetoeknee6448 I would eagerly have pitched a Frasier spinoff but then I definitely wanted to do something more fresh and original and contemporary.
It's puzzling how you're just offshoring *all* the blame on the networks and studio heads, who are irrefutably a huge part of the problem of course but it doesn't change the fact so MANY writers in Hollywood now are literally creatively bankrupt window-lickers that are terrified of originality and the idea of creating a new IP . . Notice the writer strikes had little to nothing to do with this exact problem . . . On every single production level in Hollywood there's a fundamental problem (or a myriad of them), with soulless network executives and studio heads that don't remotely care about the quality of their work or core audiences, creatively bankrupt-pandering writers/directors/producers, the mind boggling and asinine new standards Movies/TV shows now have to abide by (i.e. the entire cast needs to be racially and gender diverse/production team needs to be diverse etc)-that is if they even want to be made and nominated for awards, it's one giant shit show that's only going to get worse @@jabrokneetoeknee6448
@@CommanderLongJohn It seems pretty clear to me that the current trend in Hollywood is part of a larger pattern… every time a new technology threatens to disrupt the film industry (like streaming) executives on the business side of film making tend to become more risk-avoidant and choose to finance only safe projects that guarantee a return. The same thing was happening in the 1950s and 60s in the wake of television… the big studio musicals and grand Roman period pieces of those decades were like the Transformers and Spider-Man of today. Eventually, there came a renaissance in the 70s and 80s when audiences demonstrated there was an appetite for creative and original productions. We’re just witnessing a very old cycle. I don’t think human beings are somehow just magically less creative than they were before. That’s a juvenile explanation
In the original Martin brought a tatty chair into Frasier's apartment because it was comfortable and brought him joy. It was something human and relatable that created realistic conflict. In the reboot, Freddie brings in a giant light up air hockey table that plays obnoxious music specifically to antagonise his father. There's potential in the new one, but it's currently desperately lacking subtlety or depth.
Can I just say outside of his actor's performance because he's a talented guy, I hate the character of Freddie? He's absolutely obnoxious and not in an endearing way like Frasier or Niles or even their Dad. All he does every single episode is complain, antagonize or yell at his Dad. And it genuinely pissed me off that he lied about his Dad being dead and is not called out for this.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 The idea that THIS is Freddy is so laughable it's insane . . . Frasier and Lilith were literally the epitome of upper-crust-white collar-parents, Frasier bought him "educational toys" for Christmas, they made sure he went to a super fancy private school, his interests consisted of astrology and computers-he was BEYOND excited to go visit Microsoft HQ in one episode early on, he participated and won the National Spelling Bee, he excelled in school and got great grades, and as we've seen spent an extremely minimal time with his grandad-point being there isn't even remotely a chance Freddy turns out the way he does. The fact that he's basically young Martin makes it even more absurd too, they could MAYBE pass this off if he was like a mix between early seasons Frasier and Martin, but they purposely made him into Martin 2.0, and as you said he's waaaaay too antagonistic/bitchy and it couldn't possibly feel more unnatural and forced if they tried.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 This is lazy writing, borrowing ideas from the original. In Cheers Frasier's dad is dead, creating a continuity error. It gets corrected when Frasier admits that when he was living back in Boston, he lied and said Marty was dead.
100 percent Martin liked it because it was not pretentious and was comfortable. Annoying Frasier with it was a secondary reason not the primary. If I was there I would have asked Freddie if he is 9 years old? No one uses an air hockey table as a dining room table. Sounds like the idea of a 9 year old.
I am so tired of reboots can't Hollywood come up with anything original anymore? And they're rebooting things that don't need to be rebooted because they were so great to begin with.
Seeing as _Frasier_ was a successful spin-off of _Cheers,_ perhaps they should have put _Frasier_ in a completely different situation, rather than try to copy characterizations we've all seen (and were done better) before. I noted in my own comment that they might've tried doing a drama, like _Trapper John MD._ But I think the backlash would have been even greater, given these less tolerant times.
What's sort of ironic to me is that the people who say that Hollywood can't come up with anything original seem to overlap with people who talk about "woke agendas" and refuse to watch an original idea because it incorporates different cultures and identities into it as part of the original idea. I'm not saying that you specifically do, it's just something I've noticed on the wider internet.
Seeing clips of the original Frasier and the new Frasier side by side really amplifies how mediocre the reboot is. So sad, I was so looking forward to a Frasier reboot, but to me it falls flat. I'd rather watch re-runs of the original, which I do all the time. Truly one of the best shows of all time.
Don't go by this video, Dood. It's bad; Frasier 2023 is fantastic, and the best show of 2023 in general. Do the paramountplus free trial, and start with watching the commentary episode about Frasier 2023 to get the background of the writers and OG creator coming back, and check out the sequel yourself. It is genuinely heartwarming, funny, respectful of the source material and what came before, and really well done. This channel is garbage, i won't be watching more of whatever channel this vid is on lol
@@BigCowProductions meh..it's very bland. Best of the year, certainly, but entertainment has been like dumpster diving for 2 decades now so that isn't really hard to achieve. This current vision of the show is just bad. There's very little of quality in it and therefore, it is a bad show.
I agree. The real problem with this new show is how it undoes the accomplishments of the original. Frasier finding love made him appear to have overcome his past mistakes with women. Half the comedy, and story, was about Frasier developing his understanding of what made a relationship work. Him taking that chance, and leaving his ending open for inspiration, was brilliant. The beginning “what happened” of Frasier just decided to show him to have made another mistake in love. I hear Frasier say his life feel apart again and I’m left with “so, what was the point of the original Frasier show?” I mean, everyone else in the original show developed for the better. Roz couldn’t find love until she grew to love her daughter. Niles was in an unhappy marriage until he was with Daphne. Daphne was odd and emotionally immature until Niles calms her. Martin was a stick in the mud until he grew in his relationship with Frasier. And it did an amazing job of making the audience believe that a father and son relationship could truly be healthy after years of having nothing in common. Not to mention that the jokes around a psychiatrist, having understood the psyche, doesn’t seem to have grasp on how the world works. All of that made the show work. There was laughter, heart, character development, and like-able characters. This new show? It undoes it all.
@@henryjoshual1848 They aired the first two episodes on CBS. And yeah, it would be nice if all episodes would air on TV. But you must know somebody that has Paramount+. They haven't cracked down on password sharing, yet.
I watched the first episode…..it wasn’t horrible but I was left feeling sad. I missed the other members in the group. I’ve watched the original series about 5 times on top of seeing it on TV when it first aired. It was funny. It was original, it was heartwarming. It just lacks so much from the original. I’ll continue to watch it and maybe it will grow on me. I miss all the other characters though.
To use a hackneyed phrase: "You can never go home". But guess what? This new home is really funny too. I thought I'd hate the Reboot and I've watched Frasier since it originally aired and then Reruns then on DVD and then to Streaming. The Frasier reboot IMHO is terrific. IMO I think it would have been terrible if the entire old cast was brought back as there would be no growth or realism at all, it's like waiting for the "FRIENDS" reboot when they all wind up in the same retirement home! ; ) in these 20 years I've certainly changed, I now use Text message writing along with regular writing to communicate and I certainly didn't do that 20 years ago.
Its very important to see how the first season pans out...if its any good im sure you will see Niles, Daphne and even Sam Malone pop their heads in for a few episodes!
Saying that the reboot has no chance because of the missing cast is pretty ironic because the whole premise of the OG run was a single character of a series with a memorable cast missing. The problem is that you can't do a good revival if you are only interested in following the same exact beats. There are good ingredients in this show, I hope they can find the right balance.
Touche. I think this reboot needed not to just examine what made Frasier work in a vacuum, but what made ot work in comparison to Cheers. How does one successfully spinoff from a legendary series?
It ho honestly seem like a natural evolution of Fraizer. He’s always learning n must adjust to a new thing and we are seeing the next phase and challenge he must overcome.
It's telling that every single literal laugh out loud moment I got from the clips shown in this video are the ones from the original show. Also really hammers home how important the supporting cast was to the show named Frasier.
"How exciting to be present at the birth of a new phobia." Good luck to Freddy or the Harvard lady to nail a delivery as hard as Niles/DHP nailed that one. It's just incredible what they did back then. The 90s truly had something. Every movie and TV show was just better in every way except CGI.
To many writers grew up today watching iCarly and thinking that was funny. Now they emulate that and the generation that grew up on real comedy has to suffer.
The only original actor who is unable to be in this new series is frasier father as the actor passed away. Everyone else is available, perhaps the new series could have shown how frasier and his brother coped without his father.
But Cheers was about several characters not named after one particular character and the characters family. Also the producers of the 90s frasier took a risk with the show at the time because it didn't have Ted danson and co in it. Unfortunately this modern version seems disconnected from everything.
I think Freddie should have had more of Lilliths personality. He needed to be in the same career as Frasier and Lilith and be in competition with Frasier much like Niles was. The new show is so missing this dynamic. This would bring out Frasier’s competitiveness and frustration. The reboot needed to remove the father son conflicts from the original. It worked great for Frasier to be the son but now as the father, it just doesn’t bring out Frasiers true personality. The best part of the old show was all the crazy things he did and as a young man that worked but not so much as the older father imagine. You need more pressure scenes on Frasier to create the funny reactions that he was so good at.
And Niles and Daphne's son should be similar to Daphne's brother Simon. He would embarrass Frasier and psychiatrist Fredy and they would always have to bail him out of his misadventures. Frasier and Niles could talk on the phone wondering what went wrong with him. Simon visited too much when David was growing up.
I love this show so far, I just wish they would incorporate more of the Cheers people being as he is back in Boston. They don't have to be in every episode but they are a big piece of a time in his life.
The problem is that we got attached to the characters in the original. Niles and Fraser's interactions are priceless. The writers did a great job in the one line insults toward each other.
I don't think that Frasier and Charlotte splitting up undoes the ending of the old show. They had around 20 years together before the relationship ran out of steam. It happens. That doesn't make those relationship meaningless. If they had said he got to Chicago and she told him to F off right away, that would have undone it. I hope they give it time to find it's feet. I've seen the first 3 episodes and thought the first two were very funny. The show have promise.
There is no depth or feeling in the new Frasier. A long relationship was ended and just gets a throw away line? He's not mourning the loss of love? Very superficial and cold...
@@lenawagenfuehr53 it’s not meant to be a CONTINUATION of the original series!!! it’s a whole separate arc. it’s season 1 not season 12. i don’t seeing acting like this with the Cheers to Frasier where they barely talked about the divorce or his suicide attempt. y’all just bitter people who are stuck in the past and can’t appreciate trying something new. that’s probably why you’re spewing hate about the show. i can’t wait to see your response. just pulling out bullshit because it isn’t the original….its not trying to be.
It makes sense that Frasier is extremely wealthy, He was already a multimillionaire from the radio show and then did 14 years of successful TV talk. He'd easily be worth hundreds of millions at that point. I think it's a great plot point that he walked away from it all and they're mostly playing down his earlier years of frivolous spending. Buying that building would be easy for him and he did it for his family and frieinds.
The lack of patience in society these days is really tiresome. How about we wait until all episodes have been made available for viewing and then make an overall assessment instead of straight after a couple of episodes. Is that so hard?
They can’t. They need content. They probably read one tweet that was negative and quickly ran to make a video that said the ENTIRE reboot (all 3 episodes) doesn’t compare to the original 264 episodes. Plus every viewer thinks they are tv sitcom writers 😂
I mean this is nothing new, the whole reason why a lot of spin offs in the 80's-90's died in the first episode was everyone judging them on there first episodes.
@@lesliefitzgerald2354 that analogy doesn’t apply to tv shows. The first few episodes of Breaking Bad were ok at best and didn’t show the true potential the show had. The entire first seasons of Parks and Rec and the US Office weren’t great, and they only found their voice in the second seasons. Same for Always Sunny, the first season is nothing compared to what it became in the second season with Danny DeVito onwards. And I loved the Spartacus show but those first couple of eps were atrocious. Just look at the first few eps of The Simpsons, too. So the first taste of a show is not an indicator of the entire fruit.
I'd like to see your take on the slut shaming of Roz that kind of ran through the original. She was never shamed by it and it was progressive in that regards, but there was a lot of jokes at the expense of her sex positive lifestyle. Part of that is obviously society was different 30 years ago, but sometimes it feels a bit cheap. Plus Frasier wasn't exactly Joe Celibate!
Thank you! Came here to say this 💯 Especially from Niles; I loved his character as a young teen, but on rewatch was shocked at what an absolute asshole he was to Roz 🙁
@@bea4156 ultimately I think it became friendly sparring between the two (and early on there was no love lost between them anyway) but yeah, especially early on it was pretty cruel.
I was never comfortable with the trope of one character in a cast being slut shamed. I never liked it in Frasier, especially since other characters had multiple partners as well. I seem to remember this type of thing in the Golden Girls as well, with Blanche being singled out. (I'm sure this also happens in other shows.)
Worst of all, Grammar as Frasier comes across so TIRED and SLOW. Granted, he's 20 years and visibly older, but that naturally robbed him of all his often explosive energy and quick wit. Problematically the writing team does not seem to have noticed Grammar's old age and are still writing for a 90s Frasier, which Grammar simply cannot inhabit anymore.
It’s amazing how common media theory is that broadcast TV is dead and streaming is the future. There are already at a half dozen streaming services that carry shows or events that people want to see and if you add them up the total no doubt comes close to premium cable monthly bills.
I'll always been a huge fan of Fraiser. Is the reboot perfect, no. Is it good? It could be..Of course Kesley is spot on, he has been with the character for 40 years! He could possibly do Frasier in his sleep by now. The rest of the cast has yet to figure out how to get to know their characters or play off each other yet. Still, I feel that to write off the new show entirely would be an injustice. After all, it only aired 3 episodes and let’s not forget that Frasier’s parent sitcom, Cheers, now considered a masterclass in its own right, finished dead last in the ratings after its first season. To each his own of course, but what holding me back from loving this new series, is this odd disconnect from work and home. I don’t find anything at Harvard, including Alan and Olivia, funny or interesting. At the same time, I believe that Frasier’s homelife may be the show’s saving grace. The actor playing Freddy is wonderful and sure, Freddy dropping out of school could be view as a bit of a stretch, but as a fire fighter, his job is to help people, like all Cranes do. Father and son work well together and I can’t wait to see what Lilith will bring to this new family dynamic.
You say we’re only 3 episodes in, but with the seasons being so short nowadays, it’s basically a third of the show. If we were gonna have 25 episodes, I wouldn’t be in a hurry for it to be amazing right off the bat. Right now it’s an okay show but if it wasn’t propped up by the fact that we loved the original show and the character of Frasier, I’m not sure we’d be there to watch 🤷♀️
This kinda touches on something I think of when a comedy I like stops being funny. It just turns into a drama. I love all the characters on Will and Grace so while the last few seasons of the original show didn't really make me laugh I still watched. And I watched the Simpsons long after it stopped being funny.
Yeah, and I also think that some characters and plots are so inseparably linked to the feel/mood/Zeitgeist of a particular era that only that specific generation will truly "get it". Frasier and the Simpsons were a defining phenomenon of the 90s, just like Seinfeld and Cheers were very specific to pop culture of the 80s.
I actually like that Freddie became a firefighter. We last saw him when he was a kid, who is truly the same as when they were a kid? It adds an interesting dynamic since parents and children often have these kind of conflicts just based on perspective
I agree! I saw some comment saying that it was unrealistic that Freddy was a firefighter because he wasn't an athletic kid. The last time we saw Freddy in the original series, he was like 14 or somewhere around there. Now he's in his 30's. I know the 14 year old me and the 30-something year old me were VERY different!
Frasier and Lilith were literally the epitome of upper-crust-white collar-parents, Frasier bought him "educational toys" for Christmas, they made sure he went to a super fancy private school, he always dressed like a 'mini-adult,' khaki pants/loafers/tucked in collar shirt with dressed hair, his interests consisted of subjects like astrology and computer science-he was BEYOND excited to go visit Microsoft HQ in one episode early on, he participated and won the National Spelling Bee, he excelled in school and got great grades, and as we've seen spent an extremely minimal time with his grandad-point being there isn't even remotely a chance Freddy turns out the way he does. Both of his parents are bouggie Doctors, prominently raised by his mother nonetheless thus he probably never even learned how to change a tire, how many children of wealthy upper-crust psychiatrists do you think end up as 'average-every man' firefighters . . ? It could almost be believable if he was at least like early seasons Frasier, there's still hints of blue blood but still 'uppity,' but they essentially made him into Martin 2.0 and it's just silly.
I've watched the first two episodes and I have enjoyed them both. The first had a lot of exposition to get through, but it had loving tribute to John Mahoney and to the character of Martin Crane. The second episode is where the real laughter for me started. I'm in learning about the new characters and starting to enjoy them. If it continues to go the direction I've seen so far, it may do what few other revived series have done...succeed.
I'll stick to watching reruns of Frasier. You hit the nail on the head, when I found out that Frasier was the only one returning then I was done because he's my least favorite if I like him at all.
But you watched the Frasier show and loved it, even if you don’t like his character that much. That means you fell in love with the other characters around him, which likely wasn’t instant but took a while for you to warm to them. That could be the same for this show. Like how Frasier left Cheers to have his own show, we lost a lot of beloved characters and found new ones, once we got used to them. That same thing is happening again but people are writing it off this time (well it’s only been 3 eps so we’ll see how it goes, but it’s still the same principle)
@@alexp601 Actually, I watched all 11 seasons of Frasier through reruns before ever watching an episode of Cheers. So it's really not the same thing for me. If I had gone from Cheers to Frasier, I might not have followed at all and when I did watch all of the episodes in order after the streamers became available, if I had been watching when Frasier debuted I would not have made it passed episode two because neither Fraiser or Niles comes off well in that episode. If Niles were in this, I might give it a chance but on the other hand, I think shows should be left where they once were in their prime glory instead of limping along in sad defeat because fans apparently can't just stay fans anymore they would rather bring back their favorite shows and potentially ruin what once beloved. I hate what is happening to all of these classics. I'm good with reruns.
Viewers need to give the new show a chance. The cast and the writers will find their groove. In real life, people change jobs, people die, and people divorce. I am happy for Kelsey Grammar. He wanted to continue to play Frasier. Kelsey is talented and if given time and space, he will be successful. One cannot compare the two shows; while it is natural to want to compare, this is a new show. It will be fun to see appearances of some of the original cast memebers in the reboot. In real life, people move away, but stay in touch with good friends. I only watched part of this video because I feel strongly that enough time has not elapsed to fairly judge the new show. Do not get discouraged, Kelsey!
I agree. If people go into the new show expecting it to be as brilliant as the original, of course they will be disappointed. But I went into it looking at it for what it is; an enjoyable show, good for a few laughs and a healthy dose of nostalgia. If people lower their expectations a bit and give it a chance, I think they'd enjoy it more. It's never going to be as good as the original, but that doesn't mean it's bad. I just hope the new show gets the chance to continue long enough to hit it's stride. Networks are too quick to cancel shows nowadays that aren't massive hits right from the start.
But this show doesn't reflect on the loss of love or an old life. Frasier makes a glib quip about his relationship with Charlotte ending, and heigh hi, he's off to Paris? The writers do not understand grief... Eve has lost her partner and is unexpectedly a single mother, but she's just bouncing around with a huge smile on her face all the time. Post partum hormones alone would be grinding her down!
@@lenawagenfuehr53 Seattle to Boston--new life. John Mahoney was mentioned in a realistic way. I understand what you are saying about Eve, but she is not a main character. She is not going to be well flushed out yet. Watch it or don't watch it. That is up to you. It is less than a 30 min. show. Every detail cannot be mentioned in the first show or two.
I think he didn;t look the part for how they changed the character, it makles zero sense that Lillith raised a jocky fireman but the show is too lazy to come up with a new cultural divide and went back to the old one
Give it time for the characters to find their voice. It’s an old school comedy in a new era, so it takes a minute to re-re-calibrate our sensibilities.
@@gizbot9366 Oh, I don't know. I liked the first season of Frasier and never really warmed up to Cheers so was not able to watch the latter, but with Frasier, i got hooked at once. Maybe because i love high brow banter that Niles and Frasier were able to deliver with perfection.
Each to their own but I’m enjoying it. I can’t remember if the original series was brilliant right out of the gate. The new series needs time to find itself but I’m along for the ride.
I’m loving the revival! It might not be reaching the heights of the original but it feels close enough to having the old show back, while being new at the same time. I’m really surprised to hear it’s been getting any hate.
People need to give the reboot a chance, do anybody remember Seinfeld the first season, parks and recs the first season, cheers, are Golden Girls the first season ? I agree the first two episodes was a little dry but I have faith that it will pick up
yes, and I don't think this Freddy has any chemistry with any of the rest of the cast at all. I think they made a poor choice in selecting this Fredrick, he doesn't fit.
I wish that they wouldn't try to revive all classic sitcoms, since many stand perfectly alone. At least we found out that Frasier and Charlotte managed to reconcile, though they've recently broken up prior to the revival.
At least they're bringing back some of the original cast, namely Bebe Neuwirth and Peri Gilpin, though it was nice for them to give a tribute to the late, great John Mahoney.
The brilliant thing about Frasier is that yes it always was about Frasier, even with such an amazing cast. The supporting cast was incredible, but even in episodes where the storyline was mostly about a different cast member, it always tied back to Frasier. He inserted himself in some way. This show has some of the best writing ever. I've enjoyed the reboot so far, but it will never live up to what it was. If the original cast was back, I think there's a chance it would, but I understand DHP's hesitance to come back. The reboot is entertaining and I hope it'll get better as it progresses, however I hope it won't taint the legacy that is the character of Frasier.
somebody mentioned the popularity of this in the UK. I think that it stars Nicholas Lyndhurst, who may not be a name in the US but is a hugely popular star here is a factor. He is so loved that people want him to succeed and were also curious to see how he transitioned to the states - given how quintessentially British he is.
Having watched the first three episodes I feel that the shows focus is a problem. Fraser (1993) spun off from Cheers successfully because it was something different. Fraser (2023) suffers because we already spent 11 years with his character as the focus. There are some interesting ideas and character setups but the central plot is just the OG Fraser setup but inverted and more contrived. In 1993 Fraser reluctantly invites his aging macho dad to live in his apartment with him. In 2023 Fraser buys up his sons apartment and building and forces him to live with him. The vibe just doesn't work as well especially with Fraser as the focus. Now if you took most of the setup but changed the focus it could work as it's own thing. What if the main character was eve, a single mother who works in a bar whose firefighting boyfriend has died at work? By the end of the pilot she and her friend Freddy agree to rent a room together to save on rent. A few episodes of the stress of the arrangement and then Freddy's dad Fraser turns up a few episodes in and agrees to try to help them. One thing leads to another and Fraser finds himself saddled with owning the building which turns out to be a massive drain so he is financially forced to become essentially their landlord. From there the show can go anywhere and you can still have Fraser work at Harvard or whatever but the focus is on a more interesting character we've only just met and Fraser is judged through her eyes. He is now her friends odd father and her miserly landlord so they immediately have an antagonist relationship that could lead to fun altercations.
Unfortunately, the writers gave no thought to Eve other than "kooky neighbour" and potential love interest for Freddy. She is complementary two dimensional, not a grieving new single mom. It's like the writers have never met a woman in real life...
Was the old Frasier one of the best shows ever? Yes. Is the new Frasier as good as the old Frasier? No. Is the new Frasier better than almost any new show on TV? Yes. That should be enough for us to sit and watch.
Yeah when I read comments about missing the old cast, they often include Moose aka Eddie and I'm like...are you kidding, the dog? The fact they used him nearly through most of the previous series is an amazing feat in of itself.
Kelsey Grammer is the energizer bunny.. So many years in sitcoms & movies .. A few scandals ( according to tabloids) aside, personally, if I see a movie title with Kelsey name, I tend to watch him. Also ,we're both born in the same decade.. Hope his reboot or sequel does well.
I think the show is funny. If it had a normal release run of 20 or so episodes, I think it could be another classic... Hell, the first season of Frasier was up and down, but had room to grow into itself...
I mean if they wanted to keep the original show alive and introduce younger audiences to them just have them watch the original on some streaming service or something.
You can’t go home again but Kelsey Grammar’s star still shines. He’s an amazing actor that is unpretentious while being totally pretentious. Kelsey’s ability to let others shine around him without needing to be the “big cheese” is magical. I remember when Fraser first came out it felt like a betrayal to Cheers. We thought that taking a “minor” character and building a show around it was suicide but look at how wrong we were. Give it time, it’s not the old Fraser but then again we aren’t the same either.
This review nails so many things about the reboot. I don't hate the reboot. It's okay. But it's definitely not original. Exactly, the character of Freddy was totally re-written to become more like Martin. And David and Alan are supposed to play off Fraiser like Niles. What's also odd, we're picking up where Frasier is a teacher at Harvard. Why did we miss out all of the years he was a famous talk show host? But, I know, it's just entertainment. However, aside from that, you said it, the writing is not on par, because it's not written by the same team. The show seems meaner and takes low jabs. Sure Niles, Frasier, and Martin all took jabs at each other, but there was a warmth between them too. We're not always are best around our family, even if we love them. Freddy just seems to have disdain for his father. There are no moments where you feel there's love or warmth under it. Alan just takes lot cheap shots at Frasier. It's a bit excessive. I will continue watching the show because I love Frasier, but if he weren't in it, I probably would have stopped watching it a long time ago. For those saying we're not giving it a chance. I loved Cheers and I quickly warmed up to Frasier when it was a new series. The reboot is not at that level.
Some of the criticism is ridiculous: 1) Why is it a surprise that he is wealthy? Apparently the TV show that he had after the end of the original show 2) yeah Freddie isn't like the kid we saw at the end of the original show. Yeah he was like 15 at the time 3) you could criticize disconnects between Cheers and Frasier too. Like in his 9 years hanging out at Cheers he hung out with a bunch of working class guys but he still couldn't relate to Martin once he got back to Seattle.
Most people seem to just want the show back no matter what...I see the crtiques but I trust the lead actor Kelsea Grammer and I think he wouldn't do anything that would f___ up the show's legacy or his own legacy...
It may not be good but it has given me one of my top Frasier lines ' Bulldog's Ave Maria' I laughed out loud at that thought. Besides that it does do it's dramatic scenes well but most of the comedy could've worked with better timing .
1:48 _When Frasier was at his most unlikable- morally righteous vain and pompous- it was our love for those around him and their hilarious way of calling him out that made the whole work._ _This was also part of what made the show interesting it showed that (contrary to common wisdom about main characters needing to be “likable”), you could build a funny and beloved sitcom around a character most couldn't relate to and often might find profoundly unlikable._ _And this led to an experience where we got to watch Fraser push beyond his worst qualities and overwhelming ego. The show never let him off the hook but while accepting these failings, It ultimately modeled and applauded his attempt to be better and to help others._ Reminds me of another successful sitcom of the '70s.
I loved the original Frazier and was excited to hear a new one was in the making. Kelsey Grammer does a wonderful job in the new one but the the other new characters just do not help it at all. Their acting abilities are not good in this show.
It’s a shame that they didn’t approach it from a view of “how would Frasier handle loss (Martin) and aging. The sands of time - have him drop into Cheers to see it’s just totally different and no one knows his name. It would be all about character, instead of just weak imitation.
If possible I would love to watch a take on Frasier Crane Day, it was a silly episode that I think highlighted the flaws of Frasier's character while simultaneously showing off the true heart of the character and why he does what he does. A fun episode all round, it would be a good one episode character study.
I laughed more times watching clips from the original series in this video…than I did in the new series first three episodes. The writing and cast just not as good unfortunately.
This isn't really the point and it wouldn't make the show any better but how could they be clueless enough not to include a dog? Everyone loved that damn dog.
The new series has just started. It will need time to settle. Virtually the whole cast is new. It is actually much better than I feared. Nick Lyndhurst is a good addition to the cast, and Kelsey's performance is as good as it has ever been. Give them a break and give them a chance.
I found the pilot episode to lack the witty banter and cleaver timing of the original series. But its hard to get lightning in a bottle twice. I'm not the biggest fan of the show but it was very entertaining and so well written.
I loved watching Frasier and I watched all the episodes… so when I got to watch the first episode for free..i smiled when Frasier came on screen…I enjoyed seeing him in this role again…plus I liked the mention of the other characters… I did laugh when Niles and Daphne’s son came on because I could see them trying to have those characters there without them there…Although I did wonder if there would be small chance of seeing the old cast come back for a few episodes. I refuse to get another subscription just to watch a show but I think if I had it I would watch it… it may not be the same but I think more for me it’s some what of nostalgia and I think that is what they decided to bring this back.
Maybe this is something that will come up later on, but I found the main problem so far is that the humour and setting still feels like the 90s. There is something interesting in the idea of how do you adapt a character like Frasier Crane to our lowest common denominator, everything is a culture war mentality, but it feels far too safe to even ask those questions.
It would be super interesting to watch an analysis on the Slow Burn romance trope using Niles and Daphne as an example on how to make it perfectly. Not only was super long and super slow, but once they got together they managed to keep making both characters work and to explore new themes and psychological aspects through their new dynamic as a couple (unlike most sitcom-slowburn romances, that get boring when they start dating)
On a similar note, the trope of hiding an actress’s pregnancy on screen. New Girl and Friends did it. And with Daphne they said she’d put on stress pounds.
@@alexp601 Yes! That episode where they explore how hard it was for her to put up with the pressure of Niles's idealised image of her was just brilliant!
@@LadyVonHautkopfI totally agree, but online you will find people yelping that it was fat-shaming her 🙄 It was a creative way to include a pregnant actress in show that wasn't ready for her character to be pregnant yet.
@@lenawagenfuehr53 Well, you will find people yelping about everything in the internet 😂 But even the fat shaming could be analysed too. It is true Daphne getting heavier was treated as something concerning by the other characters, but honestly if a super thin friend of mine suddenly gain a lot of weight I'd be worried too, just like if some one suddenly loses a lot of weight. Drastic physical changes can be concerning 😅 That's why Niles not seeing any change at all was even more worring
i'm a Frasier super fan. I enjoyed episodes 1 & 2 of the reboot but episode 3 was disappointing. I noticed positive reviews I read came from UK publications. It's interesting to note Fraiser has been shown daily literally for the last 30 years in the UK/ Ireland! so viewers there probably still feel connected to the character in a way that other audiences do not.
I'd give it some time. Especially when remembering that Frasier Original went through major changes early on. Whatever the franchise, you'll get a chunk of the fans who'll loudly hate the new addition because it is either too much like the original OR because it's too different. I take the mixed reviews as a hopeful sign at this early stage.
The original Frasier is a classic in television history while the reboot is mediocre and dependent upon Kelsey Grammer carrying the cast from scene to scene.
Oh gosh, this is going to be brutal... They're gonna start comparing the season finale to "My Coffee With Niles" and it's things like that which will result in scathing comments. I actually like this show, 3 episodes in, it's better than every other soft reboot/sequel/recreation series that ive watched (Except for HoTD, but that's only better because I have a full season, and I must admit that I have read the story that's about to be adapted, so that skews things in that show's favor - GoT had no real end, the dance of dragons has a bombastic historical fantasy civil war that has amazing build up, and a fantastic third act where multiple story lines culminate in an extremely satisfying manner). So yeah, the only "Sequel" that topped this was HoTD, that's a really high bar to clear anyway.
I feel like the divide is between fans who wanted a direct continuation and all returning cast members (minus John Mahoney, of course), and those who are able to accept much of the cast didn't want to return and are open to something different. Personally, I wanted a new chapter in Frasier's life. I think having the cast return en masse would've been great in one sense, but we got 11 seasons of that, and there were a good few story retreads in those 11 seasons (X character is mistaken to be gay, for instance--twice with Frasier, once with Martin). I've only seen the first episode so far, and while every aspect isn't clicking with me, I enjoyed most of it. It's easy to forget that Season 1 of the original series wasn't all smooth sailing. David Hyde Pierce didn't figure out how to make Niles come across as natural for about a season--watch again and he's incredibly wooden in his delivery early on. Martin was pretty unpleasant at the offset, but became more palatable as the relationship between him and Frasier grew, and eventually became many viewers' favorite character.
The problem is the writers / the plot. Fredy the fireman is ridiculous. That is never what Fredy would have grown up to be. They are just trying to repeat the dynamic between Frasier and Martin but that doesn't work when Frasier is the dad. They need to make Fredy to be the person young Fredy would have grown up to be. That is either a professor or a psychiatrist. Also making David a younger more clumsy Niles doesn't work. He should have been the one Frasier and Fredy were embarrassed by because he turned out to be similar to his uncle Simon.
I think Kelsey is great in the new series but it’s missing a Niles character. His professor buddy is one of the only other actors I enjoy on the show. His son isn’t doing it for me.
I didn’t care for the new Freddy either. They need to write much better lines for him and he needs to loosen up. A lot. So wooden. I’m sure he’ll get better as time goes by or maybe they’ll round out his character or something? My husband and I are both super fans, so we’ll be watching no matter what. 😃😄
As much as I wanted this to succeed, I was left depressed after the first episode. Perhaps it should have gone the way of _Trapper John MD._ The M*A*S*H character, which was originally placed in a comedy set during the Korean War, was then updated to current times and never tried to be a comedy but was a straight up drama. Though, I imagine that too would've garnered some backlash in these oddly less tolerant times.🤷🏼♂️ I hope your Patreon endeavor is everything you hope. Your analyses have always been enlightening and I'd love to see your take on film and TV. And while I am not in a position to join, I wish you great success.
I personally enjoyed the first episode (and the other two) and am happy Frasier is back in some form. It doesn’t have to be ‘perfect’ or reinvent the wheel, it just has to be fun and occasionally funny, and leave you smiling. And for me it does that.
Glad to hear that @@alexp601. I hope it gets better and you are one of many that continue to enjoy it. Sadly, I had issues with the portrayal of _Freddy._ Actually, he and _David,_ both. Hopefully that will change over time. Afterall, some of my most beloved shows had problematic first seasons.
I don’t hate it. I think this format of sitcom is outdated. I loved it in 90s/00s but HIMYM and Big Bang Theory showed that having an audience laughter doesn’t help but hinder a home viewer’s experience now. I believe this is why Friends knows never to do a reunion series because they would disappoint the fans. Freddie doesn’t work because though I can believe he’s chosen a path such as Martin’s, he doesn’t have the traits I think would be present from being Lilith & Frasier’s son, as well as his own character in the original series. If David is like his parents why isn’t Freddie even a bit like his mother and/or father. There would surely be some of his former privileged habits coming up and maybe that could be fun to watch..Having Freddie fight against his early programming and Frasier’s psychiatry play a part in it. The cast are nice but like most sitcoms it feels like they’re acting to the camera rather than interacting with each other. I think early Friends and all of Frasier benefitted from great acting where the chemistry worked. You bought them as characters rather than zany people with odd speech patterns as if someone was watching. It’s interesting to rewatch Frasier with a different perspective and seeing it as more of a view of liberal elite life (maybe some of Kelsey’s influence) where the ‘old fashioned’ cop Marty votes for a ultra conservative candidate and downplays younger generational customs. Seems much more sanitised compared to what we know today. Would be interesting if Mahoney was still here to see how Martin fit into a Trump warped America.
I’m hoping the eventual episode with Lilith will shine some light on how Freddie became Freddie. Maybe one of the reasons he is different is because his mom was so overbearing that he went off in a different direction. I mean, his dad was out of town practically his whole life, and if Freddie is a Crane, I’m sure as he got older he wanted to get out away from his mom, even though I’m sure he still loves her
So far, everybody's too nice to each other in this new series. The old series had everybody in seething, barely repressed conflict and most of the joy was in hearing the cerebral barbs in the conversations between them. When they brought Lilith back in the new series immediately it went back to that kind of dialogue and it worked. Unfortunately, the new series hasn't got the tensions between characters that the old series had, so the opportunity for that kind of humour which was such a big part of the original is gone, and I don't see how they can get it back without these characters having a falling out. Jack Cutmore-Scott seems to have been chosen based on his looks and charm rather than comic acting ability - this is a key character and they should've chosen a character actor with a track record in comedy.
I just hope it gets the chance to do that. Networks are too quick nowadays to cancel anything that's not a massive hit right out of the gate. i hope they renew for another season and give it a chance to hit its stride.
I think the young actors will be the reason the show gets canceled in episode 5 you can see the problem is with them even if the writing is not the best but frasier and alan can make it work I actually found myself having fun watching frasier and alan then the scene cut to freddy I lost interest quickly . the question is will the writing change according to what people are saying I think not every show I watched before it gets canceled the fans always explain what’s the problem what they can change to make it better but they don’t listen they are stubborn and think they know best so let’s watch the show gets canceled after two seasons at best .
The writers are trying to force too many things too soon. The younger characters are uninteresting and out of touch with reality. Frasier is old, established and rich - of course he has no idea how the world works. The young cast could give him a reality check, but no...
Frasier is a child in this new series. He has not grown at all in the last 20 years. In fact he has regressed. He is basically a rich infant not held to any sort of account by incisive witty friends. They are also children who seem to have important jobs.
Do you like the Frasier sequel? Join our PATREON to unlock our Members-Only Series “Total Take," vote on what we cover next, and earn more exciting perks: www.patreon.com/thetake
Let this show find its own voice. This is not that Fraser from the 90s. This is Fraser who is 20 years older and 20 years different. I'm willing to let this show cook. I'm excited to see how this new show moves forward in time.
90s Frasier was almost perfect. In my eyes: if something is that good that stood the test of time, it doesn't need to be continued/rebooted/sequel/prequel/ whatever.
I don't care for this one. Don't need to. Old frasier still sits well and is still rewatchable today.
@@Amp661 Ok and that is fine. But this is not a reboot.This is a continuation of the character 20 plus years later.
I think it's really good so far, well directed and there's lots of room for the writers and cast to hit their stride even more. Whenever I rewatch the original pilot for the first one, I'm always amazed at how incredibly good it is across the board and how rare that is.
@@matthewweng8483it seems cheaply made... When watching it, it's like a play or a skit. Doesn't seem like an actual tv show.
A chess match with his father revealed a connection between the two that was easily missed. His dad beat Frasier time after time. When he expressed his frustration to his dad, Martin pointed out that chess was similar to detective work in its demand for anticipation, strategy, and cunning. In other words, Frasier and Niles inherited a good deal of their intelligence from their dad, who was a very sharp man. The two sons made the mistake of confusing culture with intelligence. Always thought that was one of the best scenes in the whole series with a lesson that is worth incorporating into real life.
What you said was spot on , my favorite episode was two , Frasier and Niles trying to run a restaurant that was hilarious and that episode where the newspaper salesman hates Frasier and frasier is trying to find out why , it was my favorite because I have a twin brother and my father is a lot like Frasier , we are like Martin crane , me and my brother when we were young would always try to start something and my dad would walk in the room and would say it wont work , and how he explained it was identical to how Martin explained to Frasier , and that episode where the newspaper guy (Tony Shaloub) hated him what was funny was Frasier wanted to be liked by someone so badly he ended up destroying the man's livelihood
Remember when Niles was pretending to be Daphne’s husband in front of her old boyfriend? Frazier told Martin he had to leave because he was not clever enough to play along. Then Martin said he was an astronaut? It’s like Frazier was always surprised that his dad was as sharp as a tack.
@mynameispeaches sharp and yet he still got shot. Yeah that computes
@@mynameispeachesand when Daphne's ex left and was like "you're all terrible except for that charming old astronaut!"
Ok - explain how Woody repeatedly beat him too?
Conclusion - Frasier’s just bad at chess!
The problem with this reboot is not that it's bad, it's not. The problem is that it is not great. 'Great' was the bar set by Frasier, which means anything less than this falls short.
Agreed. I feel like it could potentially get there, but it's gonna need some time to marinate. Find it's feet. It's not far off either. I actually enjoyed the whole season, though i could see where it fell short in a few areas. But with some time, I'm sure it's going to be fine.
no, its not even good.
You've nailed it. There were a couple of really good episodes and a couple not so great but most were good without being great.
No one can replace the old cast, Niles, Daphne, Roz and Martin, who were and always will be simply the best.
and Eddie
Don't forget Eddie.
Lives change it makes more sense that there is a different cast he is also in a different city. Be odd if everyone moved with him
I'll flat out say, today's generation of writers seem to create based off imitating, and that is a fundamental problem right there. Imitation is why so many of these nostalgia products feel fake.
I don't think it's the writers, I think it's the studio heads ordering them to do that. They know "formula y" has worked in the past, so it's a safer bet to go with that rather than risk money on an original formula. Just see all of Disney's live-action remakes as one of the worst examples.
It’s puzzling that so many are willing to point the finger at writers (really? as if they’re given full creative control?) and not at the network and studio heads that own the intellectual property and hire a committee of staff writers to churn out reboots and sequels and prequels. Isn’t it obvious that rebooting Frasier is a cynical business decision? It’s not like hard up Hollywood writers are going door to door pitching spec scripts for a Frasier reboot out of a burning passion for the series😂
@@jabrokneetoeknee6448 I would eagerly have pitched a Frasier spinoff but then I definitely wanted to do something more fresh and original and contemporary.
It's puzzling how you're just offshoring *all* the blame on the networks and studio heads, who are irrefutably a huge part of the problem of course but it doesn't change the fact so MANY writers in Hollywood now are literally creatively bankrupt window-lickers that are terrified of originality and the idea of creating a new IP . . Notice the writer strikes had little to nothing to do with this exact problem . . . On every single production level in Hollywood there's a fundamental problem (or a myriad of them), with soulless network executives and studio heads that don't remotely care about the quality of their work or core audiences, creatively bankrupt-pandering writers/directors/producers, the mind boggling and asinine new standards Movies/TV shows now have to abide by (i.e. the entire cast needs to be racially and gender diverse/production team needs to be diverse etc)-that is if they even want to be made and nominated for awards, it's one giant shit show that's only going to get worse @@jabrokneetoeknee6448
@@CommanderLongJohn It seems pretty clear to me that the current trend in Hollywood is part of a larger pattern… every time a new technology threatens to disrupt the film industry (like streaming) executives on the business side of film making tend to become more risk-avoidant and choose to finance only safe projects that guarantee a return. The same thing was happening in the 1950s and 60s in the wake of television… the big studio musicals and grand Roman period pieces of those decades were like the Transformers and Spider-Man of today. Eventually, there came a renaissance in the 70s and 80s when audiences demonstrated there was an appetite for creative and original productions. We’re just witnessing a very old cycle. I don’t think human beings are somehow just magically less creative than they were before. That’s a juvenile explanation
In the original Martin brought a tatty chair into Frasier's apartment because it was comfortable and brought him joy. It was something human and relatable that created realistic conflict.
In the reboot, Freddie brings in a giant light up air hockey table that plays obnoxious music specifically to antagonise his father.
There's potential in the new one, but it's currently desperately lacking subtlety or depth.
Can I just say outside of his actor's performance because he's a talented guy, I hate the character of Freddie? He's absolutely obnoxious and not in an endearing way like Frasier or Niles or even their Dad. All he does every single episode is complain, antagonize or yell at his Dad. And it genuinely pissed me off that he lied about his Dad being dead and is not called out for this.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 The idea that THIS is Freddy is so laughable it's insane . . . Frasier and Lilith were literally the epitome of upper-crust-white collar-parents, Frasier bought him "educational toys" for Christmas, they made sure he went to a super fancy private school, his interests consisted of astrology and computers-he was BEYOND excited to go visit Microsoft HQ in one episode early on, he participated and won the National Spelling Bee, he excelled in school and got great grades, and as we've seen spent an extremely minimal time with his grandad-point being there isn't even remotely a chance Freddy turns out the way he does.
The fact that he's basically young Martin makes it even more absurd too, they could MAYBE pass this off if he was like a mix between early seasons Frasier and Martin, but they purposely made him into Martin 2.0, and as you said he's waaaaay too antagonistic/bitchy and it couldn't possibly feel more unnatural and forced if they tried.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 This is lazy writing, borrowing ideas from the original. In Cheers Frasier's dad is dead, creating a continuity error. It gets corrected when Frasier admits that when he was living back in Boston, he lied and said Marty was dead.
100 percent Martin liked it because it was not pretentious and was comfortable. Annoying Frasier with it was a secondary reason not the primary. If I was there I would have asked Freddie if he is 9 years old? No one uses an air hockey table as a dining room table. Sounds like the idea of a 9 year old.
@@CommanderLongJohnand they completely forgot he's Jewish, too!
It's really missing David Hyde-Pierce, the supporting cast is a bit flat, the guy who plays his son especially so.
I am so tired of reboots can't Hollywood come up with anything original anymore? And they're rebooting things that don't need to be rebooted because they were so great to begin with.
The ironic thing of course being that this comment is also a reboot we keep seeing over and over
Seeing as _Frasier_ was a successful spin-off of _Cheers,_ perhaps they should have put _Frasier_ in a completely different situation, rather than try to copy characterizations we've all seen (and were done better) before.
I noted in my own comment that they might've tried doing a drama, like _Trapper John MD._ But I think the backlash would have been even greater, given these less tolerant times.
Originality is too much of a risk for Hollywood
What's sort of ironic to me is that the people who say that Hollywood can't come up with anything original seem to overlap with people who talk about "woke agendas" and refuse to watch an original idea because it incorporates different cultures and identities into it as part of the original idea. I'm not saying that you specifically do, it's just something I've noticed on the wider internet.
@@CaesiusX good idea!
Seeing clips of the original Frasier and the new Frasier side by side really amplifies how mediocre the reboot is. So sad, I was so looking forward to a Frasier reboot, but to me it falls flat. I'd rather watch re-runs of the original, which I do all the time. Truly one of the best shows of all time.
Don't go by this video, Dood. It's bad; Frasier 2023 is fantastic, and the best show of 2023 in general.
Do the paramountplus free trial, and start with watching the commentary episode about Frasier 2023 to get the background of the writers and OG creator coming back, and check out the sequel yourself.
It is genuinely heartwarming, funny, respectful of the source material and what came before, and really well done.
This channel is garbage, i won't be watching more of whatever channel this vid is on lol
Talent in the 90s was so RAW. 🔥
@@BigCowProductions meh..it's very bland. Best of the year, certainly, but entertainment has been like dumpster diving for 2 decades now so that isn't really hard to achieve. This current vision of the show is just bad. There's very little of quality in it and therefore, it is a bad show.
I agree. The real problem with this new show is how it undoes the accomplishments of the original. Frasier finding love made him appear to have overcome his past mistakes with women. Half the comedy, and story, was about Frasier developing his understanding of what made a relationship work. Him taking that chance, and leaving his ending open for inspiration, was brilliant. The beginning “what happened” of Frasier just decided to show him to have made another mistake in love. I hear Frasier say his life feel apart again and I’m left with “so, what was the point of the original Frasier show?” I mean, everyone else in the original show developed for the better. Roz couldn’t find love until she grew to love her daughter. Niles was in an unhappy marriage until he was with Daphne. Daphne was odd and emotionally immature until Niles calms her. Martin was a stick in the mud until he grew in his relationship with Frasier. And it did an amazing job of making the audience believe that a father and son relationship could truly be healthy after years of having nothing in common. Not to mention that the jokes around a psychiatrist, having understood the psyche, doesn’t seem to have grasp on how the world works. All of that made the show work. There was laughter, heart, character development, and like-able characters. This new show? It undoes it all.
I’m just annoyed that it’s not on a network that everyone can watch. How can it get the viewers if many people can’t afford it? 😭
the episodes will eventually show up on network tv. Paramount can't make money on the show without network screenings.
@@henryjoshual1848 They aired the first two episodes on CBS. And yeah, it would be nice if all episodes would air on TV. But you must know somebody that has Paramount+. They haven't cracked down on password sharing, yet.
I watched the first episode…..it wasn’t horrible but I was left feeling sad. I missed the other members in the group. I’ve watched the original series about 5 times on top of seeing it on TV when it first aired. It was funny. It was original, it was heartwarming. It just lacks so much from the original. I’ll continue to watch it and maybe it will grow on me. I miss all the other characters though.
To use a hackneyed phrase: "You can never go home". But guess what? This new home is really funny too. I thought I'd hate the Reboot and I've watched Frasier since it originally aired and then Reruns then on DVD and then to Streaming. The Frasier reboot IMHO is terrific. IMO I think it would have been terrible if the entire old cast was brought back as there would be no growth or realism at all, it's like waiting for the "FRIENDS" reboot when they all wind up in the same retirement home! ; ) in these 20 years I've certainly changed, I now use Text message writing along with regular writing to communicate and I certainly didn't do that 20 years ago.
Lmao you sound like all the miserable people the first time Frasier aired about cheers character. Lmao so fucking hilarious.
It takes time for any new show to settle in. Often the first couple aren't the best of what it's got to offer.
Its very important to see how the first season pans out...if its any good im sure you will see Niles, Daphne and even Sam Malone pop their heads in for a few episodes!
@@foreignwarren7361 The first will be the last season.
Saying that the reboot has no chance because of the missing cast is pretty ironic because the whole premise of the OG run was a single character of a series with a memorable cast missing. The problem is that you can't do a good revival if you are only interested in following the same exact beats. There are good ingredients in this show, I hope they can find the right balance.
Touche. I think this reboot needed not to just examine what made Frasier work in a vacuum, but what made ot work in comparison to Cheers. How does one successfully spinoff from a legendary series?
A reboot and a spin off are two separate show ideas..
the writing is not original or funny, that is the issue, not the cast
+ @flaurehn Agreed.
It ho honestly seem like a natural evolution of Fraizer. He’s always learning n must adjust to a new thing and we are seeing the next phase and challenge he must overcome.
It's telling that every single literal laugh out loud moment I got from the clips shown in this video are the ones from the original show. Also really hammers home how important the supporting cast was to the show named Frasier.
Especially Eddy ❤️
@@peacfulearth Too true. The use of Eddy, especially in the early episodes, to show Frasier's insecurities, etc. was genius.
"How exciting to be present at the birth of a new phobia."
Good luck to Freddy or the Harvard lady to nail a delivery as hard as Niles/DHP nailed that one. It's just incredible what they did back then. The 90s truly had something. Every movie and TV show was just better in every way except CGI.
To many writers grew up today watching iCarly and thinking that was funny. Now they emulate that and the generation that grew up on real comedy has to suffer.
The missing original cast and characters is the problem for me
Yup. Exactly 💯
You're always gonna be disappointed if you compare it to the original. .
The only original actor who is unable to be in this new series is frasier father as the actor passed away. Everyone else is available, perhaps the new series could have shown how frasier and his brother coped without his father.
So I guess Frasier was a flop because it didn’t have the cast of cheers in it? Oh wait 🤔.
But Cheers was about several characters not named after one particular character and the characters family. Also the producers of the 90s frasier took a risk with the show at the time because it didn't have Ted danson and co in it. Unfortunately this modern version seems disconnected from everything.
It's not bad as a normal sit-com, but not as a Frasier sequel. It's lacking a spark.
I think Freddie should have had more of Lilliths personality. He needed to be in the same career as Frasier and Lilith and be in competition with Frasier much like Niles was. The new show is so missing this dynamic. This would bring out Frasier’s competitiveness and frustration. The reboot needed to remove the father son conflicts from the original. It worked great for Frasier to be the son but now as the father, it just doesn’t bring out Frasiers true personality. The best part of the old show was all the crazy things he did and as a young man that worked but not so much as the older father imagine. You need more pressure scenes on Frasier to create the funny reactions that he was so good at.
Or even Nanette's personality.
@@MaliceInCandylandhow would he inherit Nanette’s personality
@@hombredetacos He wouldn't but it would be a callback. They went with no personality instead.
That would have been brilliant.
And Niles and Daphne's son should be similar to Daphne's brother Simon. He would embarrass Frasier and psychiatrist Fredy and they would always have to bail him out of his misadventures. Frasier and Niles could talk on the phone wondering what went wrong with him. Simon visited too much when David was growing up.
I love this show so far, I just wish they would incorporate more of the Cheers people being as he is back in Boston. They don't have to be in every episode but they are a big piece of a time in his life.
The problem is that we got attached to the characters in the original. Niles and Fraser's interactions are priceless. The writers did a great job in the one line insults toward each other.
I don't think that Frasier and Charlotte splitting up undoes the ending of the old show.
They had around 20 years together before the relationship ran out of steam. It happens. That doesn't make those relationship meaningless. If they had said he got to Chicago and she told him to F off right away, that would have undone it.
I hope they give it time to find it's feet. I've seen the first 3 episodes and thought the first two were very funny. The show have promise.
the second episode had me in tears and i hard to break when it comes to comedy. that’s why i like Frasier, it’s beautifully well written
Did you like the original show as well?@@markjackson6431
I thought the pilot was quite good and was a nice tribute to John Mahoney.
There is no depth or feeling in the new Frasier. A long relationship was ended and just gets a throw away line? He's not mourning the loss of love? Very superficial and cold...
@@lenawagenfuehr53 it’s not meant to be a CONTINUATION of the original series!!! it’s a whole separate arc. it’s season 1 not season 12. i don’t seeing acting like this with the Cheers to Frasier where they barely talked about the divorce or his suicide attempt. y’all just bitter people who are stuck in the past and can’t appreciate trying something new. that’s probably why you’re spewing hate about the show. i can’t wait to see your response. just pulling out bullshit because it isn’t the original….its not trying to be.
It makes sense that Frasier is extremely wealthy, He was already a multimillionaire from the radio show and then did 14 years of successful TV talk. He'd easily be worth hundreds of millions at that point. I think it's a great plot point that he walked away from it all and they're mostly playing down his earlier years of frivolous spending. Buying that building would be easy for him and he did it for his family and frieinds.
Right?! The writers on this vid are ridiculous and off point on all of their arguments
The lack of patience in society these days is really tiresome. How about we wait until all episodes have been made available for viewing and then make an overall assessment instead of straight after a couple of episodes. Is that so hard?
They can’t. They need content. They probably read one tweet that was negative and quickly ran to make a video that said the ENTIRE reboot (all 3 episodes) doesn’t compare to the original 264 episodes. Plus every viewer thinks they are tv sitcom writers 😂
@@jamigoddessYep exactly, pointless content just for the sake of it. Which is a trap that ALL channels fall into.
I mean this is nothing new, the whole reason why a lot of spin offs in the 80's-90's died in the first episode was everyone judging them on there first episodes.
you don't need to eat the entire fruit to know a lemon when you taste one
@@lesliefitzgerald2354 that analogy doesn’t apply to tv shows.
The first few episodes of Breaking Bad were ok at best and didn’t show the true potential the show had. The entire first seasons of Parks and Rec and the US Office weren’t great, and they only found their voice in the second seasons. Same for Always Sunny, the first season is nothing compared to what it became in the second season with Danny DeVito onwards. And I loved the Spartacus show but those first couple of eps were atrocious. Just look at the first few eps of The Simpsons, too.
So the first taste of a show is not an indicator of the entire fruit.
I'd like to see your take on the slut shaming of Roz that kind of ran through the original. She was never shamed by it and it was progressive in that regards, but there was a lot of jokes at the expense of her sex positive lifestyle. Part of that is obviously society was different 30 years ago, but sometimes it feels a bit cheap. Plus Frasier wasn't exactly Joe Celibate!
Thank you! Came here to say this 💯 Especially from Niles; I loved his character as a young teen, but on rewatch was shocked at what an absolute asshole he was to Roz 🙁
@@bea4156 ultimately I think it became friendly sparring between the two (and early on there was no love lost between them anyway) but yeah, especially early on it was pretty cruel.
So what would you propose - Roz ends up managing the first unionized brothel in Nevada?
She was still dating when she was pregnant. Maybe she could’ve taken a few months off having sex with random guys 🤷♀️
I was never comfortable with the trope of one character in a cast being slut shamed. I never liked it in Frasier, especially since other characters had multiple partners as well. I seem to remember this type of thing in the Golden Girls as well, with Blanche being singled out. (I'm sure this also happens in other shows.)
Worst of all, Grammar as Frasier comes across so TIRED and SLOW. Granted, he's 20 years and visibly older, but that naturally robbed him of all his often explosive energy and quick wit.
Problematically the writing team does not seem to have noticed Grammar's old age and are still writing for a 90s Frasier, which Grammar simply cannot inhabit anymore.
I'm enjoying it fine. To be honest it's just really freaking cool seeing Nicholas Lyndhurst in an american show. He's a legend in the UK.
Why is he putting on an accent
@@frozengamer3030He’s not really. Listen to a recent interview with him and his real voice is pretty similar.
@@frozengamer3030 he sounds more like that than Rodney Trotter. 🤣
opens the door for a David Jason guest spot, donnit??
@@deanlowdon8381 yes he he's putting on an accent everyone is saying the same thing
It’s amazing how common media theory is that broadcast TV is dead and streaming is the future. There are already at a half dozen streaming services that carry shows or events that people want to see and if you add them up the total no doubt comes close to premium cable monthly bills.
I'll always been a huge fan of Fraiser. Is the reboot perfect, no. Is it good? It could be..Of course Kesley is spot on, he has been with the character for 40 years! He could possibly do Frasier in his sleep by now. The rest of the cast has yet to figure out how to get to know their characters or play off each other yet. Still, I feel that to write off the new show entirely would be an injustice. After all, it only aired 3 episodes and let’s not forget that Frasier’s parent sitcom, Cheers, now considered a masterclass in its own right, finished dead last in the ratings after its first season. To each his own of course, but what holding me back from loving this new series, is this odd disconnect from work and home. I don’t find anything at Harvard, including Alan and Olivia, funny or interesting. At the same time, I believe that Frasier’s homelife may be the show’s saving grace. The actor playing Freddy is wonderful and sure, Freddy dropping out of school could be view as a bit of a stretch, but as a fire fighter, his job is to help people, like all Cranes do. Father and son work well together and I can’t wait to see what Lilith will bring to this new family dynamic.
You say we’re only 3 episodes in, but with the seasons being so short nowadays, it’s basically a third of the show. If we were gonna have 25 episodes, I wouldn’t be in a hurry for it to be amazing right off the bat. Right now it’s an okay show but if it wasn’t propped up by the fact that we loved the original show and the character of Frasier, I’m not sure we’d be there to watch 🤷♀️
@@mgg5418 Fair enough-I had not considered that
This kinda touches on something I think of when a comedy I like stops being funny. It just turns into a drama. I love all the characters on Will and Grace so while the last few seasons of the original show didn't really make me laugh I still watched. And I watched the Simpsons long after it stopped being funny.
Yeah, and I also think that some characters and plots are so inseparably linked to the feel/mood/Zeitgeist of a particular era that only that specific generation will truly "get it". Frasier and the Simpsons were a defining phenomenon of the 90s, just like Seinfeld and Cheers were very specific to pop culture of the 80s.
@@kenster8270Seinfeld was not 1980's but was in the 1990's
@@ladyrose3285 You're right. And I guess the Simpsons was more of a 2000s thing, at least it peaked then.
@@kenster8270 maybe viewership wise but quality wise the first 7ish seasons were the best.
I actually like that Freddie became a firefighter. We last saw him when he was a kid, who is truly the same as when they were a kid? It adds an interesting dynamic since parents and children often have these kind of conflicts just based on perspective
And it’s similar to how his grandpa was a cop (risking his life to save people everyday) which I thought was a nice connection
@@alexp601Agreed
I agree! I saw some comment saying that it was unrealistic that Freddy was a firefighter because he wasn't an athletic kid. The last time we saw Freddy in the original series, he was like 14 or somewhere around there. Now he's in his 30's. I know the 14 year old me and the 30-something year old me were VERY different!
Frasier and Lilith were literally the epitome of upper-crust-white collar-parents, Frasier bought him "educational toys" for Christmas, they made sure he went to a super fancy private school, he always dressed like a 'mini-adult,' khaki pants/loafers/tucked in collar shirt with dressed hair, his interests consisted of subjects like astrology and computer science-he was BEYOND excited to go visit Microsoft HQ in one episode early on, he participated and won the National Spelling Bee, he excelled in school and got great grades, and as we've seen spent an extremely minimal time with his grandad-point being there isn't even remotely a chance Freddy turns out the way he does.
Both of his parents are bouggie Doctors, prominently raised by his mother nonetheless thus he probably never even learned how to change a tire, how many children of wealthy upper-crust psychiatrists do you think end up as 'average-every man' firefighters . . ? It could almost be believable if he was at least like early seasons Frasier, there's still hints of blue blood but still 'uppity,' but they essentially made him into Martin 2.0 and it's just silly.
@@CommanderLongJohn it's fiction. I think what kills movies and television is folks trying to make it as real as possible.
I've watched the first two episodes and I have enjoyed them both. The first had a lot of exposition to get through, but it had loving tribute to John Mahoney and to the character of Martin Crane. The second episode is where the real laughter for me started. I'm in learning about the new characters and starting to enjoy them. If it continues to go the direction I've seen so far, it may do what few other revived series have done...succeed.
I agree, but it won't get to continue long if more people don't give it a chance. I really hope it gets renewed.
I'll stick to watching reruns of Frasier. You hit the nail on the head, when I found out that Frasier was the only one returning then I was done because he's my least favorite if I like him at all.
But you watched the Frasier show and loved it, even if you don’t like his character that much. That means you fell in love with the other characters around him, which likely wasn’t instant but took a while for you to warm to them. That could be the same for this show.
Like how Frasier left Cheers to have his own show, we lost a lot of beloved characters and found new ones, once we got used to them.
That same thing is happening again but people are writing it off this time (well it’s only been 3 eps so we’ll see how it goes, but it’s still the same principle)
@@alexp601 Actually, I watched all 11 seasons of Frasier through reruns before ever watching an episode of Cheers. So it's really not the same thing for me. If I had gone from Cheers to Frasier, I might not have followed at all and when I did watch all of the episodes in order after the streamers became available, if I had been watching when Frasier debuted I would not have made it passed episode two because neither Fraiser or Niles comes off well in that episode. If Niles were in this, I might give it a chance but on the other hand, I think shows should be left where they once were in their prime glory instead of limping along in sad defeat because fans apparently can't just stay fans anymore they would rather bring back their favorite shows and potentially ruin what once beloved. I hate what is happening to all of these classics. I'm good with reruns.
@@alexp601Sounds like everyone loves raymond tbh.
People desperately wants lightning to strike twice.
Viewers need to give the new show a chance. The cast and the writers will find their groove. In real life, people change jobs, people die, and people divorce. I am happy for Kelsey Grammar. He wanted to continue to play Frasier. Kelsey is talented and if given time and space, he will be successful. One cannot compare the two shows; while it is natural to want to compare, this is a new show. It will be fun to see appearances of some of the original cast memebers in the reboot. In real life, people move away, but stay in touch with good friends. I only watched part of this video because I feel strongly that enough time has not elapsed to fairly judge the new show. Do not get discouraged, Kelsey!
I agree. If people go into the new show expecting it to be as brilliant as the original, of course they will be disappointed. But I went into it looking at it for what it is; an enjoyable show, good for a few laughs and a healthy dose of nostalgia. If people lower their expectations a bit and give it a chance, I think they'd enjoy it more. It's never going to be as good as the original, but that doesn't mean it's bad. I just hope the new show gets the chance to continue long enough to hit it's stride. Networks are too quick to cancel shows nowadays that aren't massive hits right from the start.
But this show doesn't reflect on the loss of love or an old life. Frasier makes a glib quip about his relationship with Charlotte ending, and heigh hi, he's off to Paris? The writers do not understand grief... Eve has lost her partner and is unexpectedly a single mother, but she's just bouncing around with a huge smile on her face all the time. Post partum hormones alone would be grinding her down!
@@lenawagenfuehr53 Seattle to Boston--new life. John Mahoney was mentioned in a realistic way. I understand what you are saying about Eve, but she is not a main character. She is not going to be well flushed out yet. Watch it or don't watch it. That is up to you. It is less than a 30 min. show. Every detail cannot be mentioned in the first show or two.
The son was an actor then and is still a semi well known actor who is still working. Should've at least put him in instead of this random imposter.
I think he didn;t look the part for how they changed the character, it makles zero sense that Lillith raised a jocky fireman but the show is too lazy to come up with a new cultural divide and went back to the old one
Nyc?
That actually would’ve been epic.
Give it time for the characters to find their voice. It’s an old school comedy in a new era, so it takes a minute to re-re-calibrate our sensibilities.
Absolutely
Agreed. The first season of the original wasn't so finely toned either. It took time for the characters to gel, just like with this one.
@@gizbot9366 Oh, I don't know. I liked the first season of Frasier and never really warmed up to Cheers so was not able to watch the latter, but with Frasier, i got hooked at once. Maybe because i love high brow banter that Niles and Frasier were able to deliver with perfection.
Each to their own but I’m enjoying it. I can’t remember if the original series was brilliant right out of the gate. The new series needs time to find itself but I’m along for the ride.
It was!
The pilot episode was kind of serious and stiff because so many characters are introduced. By episode 3 the Frasier/Niles/Marty dynamic was seamless.
I enjoy the reboot. Still keeping my fingers crossed for Niles.
I’m loving the revival! It might not be reaching the heights of the original but it feels close enough to having the old show back, while being new at the same time. I’m really surprised to hear it’s been getting any hate.
It lost me when it was put on another streaming service…..not getting another service.
People need to give the reboot a chance, do anybody remember Seinfeld the first season, parks and recs the first season, cheers, are Golden Girls the first season ? I agree the first two episodes was a little dry but I have faith that it will pick up
...episode 5 in, & it's not getting any better...dull & dry in every way imaginable!
@@sugalovely1238IKR!
The chemistry of the cast is of paramount importance.
yes, and I don't think this Freddy has any chemistry with any of the rest of the cast at all. I think they made a poor choice in selecting this Fredrick, he doesn't fit.
They should have made Frasier's son like Lilith - that would have been a great dynamic.
I wish that they wouldn't try to revive all classic sitcoms, since many stand perfectly alone. At least we found out that Frasier and Charlotte managed to reconcile, though they've recently broken up prior to the revival.
And that relationship is never examined or mourned. Charlotte asked him to go, so without a thought he hopped on the next east-bound plane 🙄
At least they're bringing back some of the original cast, namely Bebe Neuwirth and Peri Gilpin, though it was nice for them to give a tribute to the late, great John Mahoney.
Bebe is coming back. I can't remember if Roz is or not.
@@mirachan9217it's been confirmed that Roz will be back, & Lilith too.
The brilliant thing about Frasier is that yes it always was about Frasier, even with such an amazing cast. The supporting cast was incredible, but even in episodes where the storyline was mostly about a different cast member, it always tied back to Frasier. He inserted himself in some way. This show has some of the best writing ever. I've enjoyed the reboot so far, but it will never live up to what it was. If the original cast was back, I think there's a chance it would, but I understand DHP's hesitance to come back. The reboot is entertaining and I hope it'll get better as it progresses, however I hope it won't taint the legacy that is the character of Frasier.
somebody mentioned the popularity of this in the UK. I think that it stars Nicholas Lyndhurst, who may not be a name in the US but is a hugely popular star here is a factor. He is so loved that people want him to succeed and were also curious to see how he transitioned to the states - given how quintessentially British he is.
I do not like Nicholas lyndhurst, not everyone loves him and he is not hugely popular IMO
Thought he was great in "Butterflies" which had decent run here in the 80s. But I doubt people would even recognize him here.
@@petercena9497He starred in a show called Only Fools and Horses, which many would consider the greatest UK sitcom of all time.
@@hotpotato4027You may not like him, but you can’t deny he’s a popular actor here in the UK.
@@hotpotato4027 he doesn't say everybody loves him & he is very obviously hugely popular.
Having watched the first three episodes I feel that the shows focus is a problem. Fraser (1993) spun off from Cheers successfully because it was something different. Fraser (2023) suffers because we already spent 11 years with his character as the focus. There are some interesting ideas and character setups but the central plot is just the OG Fraser setup but inverted and more contrived. In 1993 Fraser reluctantly invites his aging macho dad to live in his apartment with him. In 2023 Fraser buys up his sons apartment and building and forces him to live with him. The vibe just doesn't work as well especially with Fraser as the focus.
Now if you took most of the setup but changed the focus it could work as it's own thing. What if the main character was eve, a single mother who works in a bar whose firefighting boyfriend has died at work? By the end of the pilot she and her friend Freddy agree to rent a room together to save on rent. A few episodes of the stress of the arrangement and then Freddy's dad Fraser turns up a few episodes in and agrees to try to help them. One thing leads to another and Fraser finds himself saddled with owning the building which turns out to be a massive drain so he is financially forced to become essentially their landlord. From there the show can go anywhere and you can still have Fraser work at Harvard or whatever but the focus is on a more interesting character we've only just met and Fraser is judged through her eyes. He is now her friends odd father and her miserly landlord so they immediately have an antagonist relationship that could lead to fun altercations.
That's pretty good, actually.
Unfortunately, the writers gave no thought to Eve other than "kooky neighbour" and potential love interest for Freddy. She is complementary two dimensional, not a grieving new single mom. It's like the writers have never met a woman in real life...
Was the old Frasier one of the best shows ever? Yes. Is the new Frasier as good as the old Frasier? No. Is the new Frasier better than almost any new show on TV? Yes. That should be enough for us to sit and watch.
Yeah when I read comments about missing the old cast, they often include Moose aka Eddie and I'm like...are you kidding, the dog? The fact they used him nearly through most of the previous series is an amazing feat in of itself.
Kelsey Grammer is the energizer bunny.. So many years in sitcoms & movies .. A few scandals ( according to tabloids) aside, personally, if I see a movie title with Kelsey name, I tend to watch him. Also ,we're both born in the same decade.. Hope his reboot or sequel does well.
I think the show is funny.
If it had a normal release run of 20 or so episodes, I think it could be another classic...
Hell, the first season of Frasier was up and down, but had room to grow into itself...
do a video comparing og freddy to this new one and how it doesn't line up
I mean if they wanted to keep the original show alive and introduce younger audiences to them just have them watch the original on some streaming service or something.
You can’t go home again but Kelsey Grammar’s star still shines. He’s an amazing actor that is unpretentious while being totally pretentious. Kelsey’s ability to let others shine around him without needing to be the “big cheese” is magical. I remember when Fraser first came out it felt like a betrayal to Cheers. We thought that taking a “minor” character and building a show around it was suicide but look at how wrong we were. Give it time, it’s not the old Fraser but then again we aren’t the same either.
I’m glad for the reboot in that I’m happy there is a traditional sitcom out there. It’s impossible to measure this new cast to the original
This review nails so many things about the reboot. I don't hate the reboot. It's okay. But it's definitely not original.
Exactly, the character of Freddy was totally re-written to become more like Martin.
And David and Alan are supposed to play off Fraiser like Niles.
What's also odd, we're picking up where Frasier is a teacher at Harvard. Why did we miss out all of the years he was a famous talk show host?
But, I know, it's just entertainment. However, aside from that, you said it, the writing is not on par, because it's not written by the same team.
The show seems meaner and takes low jabs. Sure Niles, Frasier, and Martin all took jabs at each other, but there was a warmth between them too.
We're not always are best around our family, even if we love them. Freddy just seems to have disdain for his father. There are no moments where you feel there's love or warmth under it. Alan just takes lot cheap shots at Frasier. It's a bit excessive.
I will continue watching the show because I love Frasier, but if he weren't in it, I probably would have stopped watching it a long time ago. For those saying we're not giving it a chance.
I loved Cheers and I quickly warmed up to Frasier when it was a new series. The reboot is not at that level.
Some of the criticism is ridiculous: 1) Why is it a surprise that he is wealthy? Apparently the TV show that he had after the end of the original show 2) yeah Freddie isn't like the kid we saw at the end of the original show. Yeah he was like 15 at the time 3) you could criticize disconnects between Cheers and Frasier too. Like in his 9 years hanging out at Cheers he hung out with a bunch of working class guys but he still couldn't relate to Martin once he got back to Seattle.
The Lilith episode is epic. They nailed that one. Instant classic.
Most people seem to just want the show back no matter what...I see the crtiques but I trust the lead actor Kelsea Grammer and I think he wouldn't do anything that would f___ up the show's legacy or his own legacy...
So far it's great and gets better every episode
An excellent idea would have been to do a spin-off of the incredible recurring Frasier character, Bebe Glazer.
That would grow old quick she’s better as an occasional person
No one's going to live long enough to make this disaster good!
Was the black actress doing a awesome Bebe, or ?
@@caty0000
...don't know what the hell you're referring to but it would be 'an' awesome, not 'a' awesome.
It may not be good but it has given me one of my top Frasier lines ' Bulldog's Ave Maria' I laughed out loud at that thought. Besides that it does do it's dramatic scenes well but most of the comedy could've worked with better timing .
It's not the original but I appreciate and am enjoying what we have so far and hope it's given a good chance to shine.
1:48 _When Frasier was at his most unlikable- morally righteous vain and pompous- it was our love for those around him and their hilarious way of calling him out that made the whole work._
_This was also part of what made the show interesting it showed that (contrary to common wisdom about main characters needing to be “likable”), you could build a funny and beloved sitcom around a character most couldn't relate to and often might find profoundly unlikable._
_And this led to an experience where we got to watch Fraser push beyond his worst qualities and overwhelming ego. The show never let him off the hook but while accepting these failings, It ultimately modeled and applauded his attempt to be better and to help others._
Reminds me of another successful sitcom of the '70s.
I loved the original Frazier and was excited to hear a new one was in the making. Kelsey Grammer does a wonderful job in the new one but the the other new characters just do not help it at all. Their acting abilities are not good in this show.
The only good thing about the reboot is that they named the pub 'Mahoney's' as a tribute to the late John Mahoney.
It’s a shame that they didn’t approach it from a view of “how would Frasier handle loss (Martin) and aging. The sands of time - have him drop into Cheers to see it’s just totally different and no one knows his name. It would be all about character, instead of just weak imitation.
I love that idea of him going back to the Cheers bar
They'd slate that idea for cashing in on old glory. You can't win these days. I think it sounds good though. 🤷🏻♂️
If possible I would love to watch a take on Frasier Crane Day, it was a silly episode that I think highlighted the flaws of Frasier's character while simultaneously showing off the true heart of the character and why he does what he does. A fun episode all round, it would be a good one episode character study.
I laughed more times watching clips from the original series in this video…than I did in the new series first three episodes. The writing and cast just not as good unfortunately.
This isn't really the point and it wouldn't make the show any better but how could they be clueless enough not to include a dog? Everyone loved that damn dog.
Cornwall has a cat I guess.
@@reisschancellor9753 Cats ain't comedy.
The new series has just started. It will need time to settle. Virtually the whole cast is new. It is actually much better than I feared. Nick Lyndhurst is a good addition to the cast, and Kelsey's performance is as good as it has ever been. Give them a break and give them a chance.
I found the pilot episode to lack the witty banter and cleaver timing of the original series. But its hard to get lightning in a bottle twice. I'm not the biggest fan of the show but it was very entertaining and so well written.
I like the Old Professor and the University President team. A nice mix of Roz and Niles and Martin and Niles in each character.
I would love to hear The Take on a show that helped raise me in the 80s - M.A.S.H.
I loved watching Frasier and I watched all the episodes… so when I got to watch the first episode for free..i smiled when Frasier came on screen…I enjoyed seeing him in this role again…plus I liked the mention of the other characters… I did laugh when Niles and Daphne’s son came on because I could see them trying to have those characters there without them there…Although I did wonder if there would be small chance of seeing the old cast come back for a few episodes.
I refuse to get another subscription just to watch a show but I think if I had it I would watch it… it may not be the same but I think more for me it’s some what of nostalgia and I think that is what they decided to bring this back.
It seems more like 3rd Rock from the Sun, without the fun supernatural stuff.
I have been enjoying this continuing saga of Fraiser Crane! So far I like it.
Maybe this is something that will come up later on, but I found the main problem so far is that the humour and setting still feels like the 90s.
There is something interesting in the idea of how do you adapt a character like Frasier Crane to our lowest common denominator, everything is a culture war mentality, but it feels far too safe to even ask those questions.
Frasier landed the plane on among the perfect endings ever. Should’ve left it alone.
I would love a video on Niles Crane. He was my favorite❤
I'd love to see this 🙌🏿
I wish jane would come back and interact with her son.
I just love Nicholas Lyndhurst, he is the reason i am watching Frasier 2023
It is just ok. It doesn't blow me away, like the Will and Grace reboot.
It would be super interesting to watch an analysis on the Slow Burn romance trope using Niles and Daphne as an example on how to make it perfectly. Not only was super long and super slow, but once they got together they managed to keep making both characters work and to explore new themes and psychological aspects through their new dynamic as a couple (unlike most sitcom-slowburn romances, that get boring when they start dating)
On a similar note, the trope of hiding an actress’s pregnancy on screen. New Girl and Friends did it. And with Daphne they said she’d put on stress pounds.
@@alexp601 Yes! That episode where they explore how hard it was for her to put up with the pressure of Niles's idealised image of her was just brilliant!
@@LadyVonHautkopfI totally agree, but online you will find people yelping that it was fat-shaming her 🙄 It was a creative way to include a pregnant actress in show that wasn't ready for her character to be pregnant yet.
@@lenawagenfuehr53 Well, you will find people yelping about everything in the internet 😂 But even the fat shaming could be analysed too. It is true Daphne getting heavier was treated as something concerning by the other characters, but honestly if a super thin friend of mine suddenly gain a lot of weight I'd be worried too, just like if some one suddenly loses a lot of weight. Drastic physical changes can be concerning 😅 That's why Niles not seeing any change at all was even more worring
i'm a Frasier super fan. I enjoyed episodes 1 & 2 of the reboot but episode 3 was disappointing. I noticed positive reviews I read came from UK publications. It's interesting to note Fraiser has been shown daily literally for the last 30 years in the UK/ Ireland! so viewers there probably still feel connected to the character in a way that other audiences do not.
I'd give it some time. Especially when remembering that Frasier Original went through major changes early on.
Whatever the franchise, you'll get a chunk of the fans who'll loudly hate the new addition because it is either too much like the original OR because it's too different. I take the mixed reviews as a hopeful sign at this early stage.
The original Frasier is a classic in television history while the reboot is mediocre and dependent upon Kelsey Grammer carrying the cast from scene to scene.
Oh gosh, this is going to be brutal...
They're gonna start comparing the season finale to "My Coffee With Niles" and it's things like that which will result in scathing comments.
I actually like this show, 3 episodes in, it's better than every other soft reboot/sequel/recreation series that ive watched (Except for HoTD, but that's only better because I have a full season, and I must admit that I have read the story that's about to be adapted, so that skews things in that show's favor - GoT had no real end, the dance of dragons has a bombastic historical fantasy civil war that has amazing build up, and a fantastic third act where multiple story lines culminate in an extremely satisfying manner).
So yeah, the only "Sequel" that topped this was HoTD, that's a really high bar to clear anyway.
I feel like the divide is between fans who wanted a direct continuation and all returning cast members (minus John Mahoney, of course), and those who are able to accept much of the cast didn't want to return and are open to something different. Personally, I wanted a new chapter in Frasier's life. I think having the cast return en masse would've been great in one sense, but we got 11 seasons of that, and there were a good few story retreads in those 11 seasons (X character is mistaken to be gay, for instance--twice with Frasier, once with Martin).
I've only seen the first episode so far, and while every aspect isn't clicking with me, I enjoyed most of it. It's easy to forget that Season 1 of the original series wasn't all smooth sailing. David Hyde Pierce didn't figure out how to make Niles come across as natural for about a season--watch again and he's incredibly wooden in his delivery early on. Martin was pretty unpleasant at the offset, but became more palatable as the relationship between him and Frasier grew, and eventually became many viewers' favorite character.
The problem is the writers / the plot. Fredy the fireman is ridiculous. That is never what Fredy would have grown up to be. They are just trying to repeat the dynamic between Frasier and Martin but that doesn't work when Frasier is the dad. They need to make Fredy to be the person young Fredy would have grown up to be. That is either a professor or a psychiatrist. Also making David a younger more clumsy Niles doesn't work. He should have been the one Frasier and Fredy were embarrassed by because he turned out to be similar to his uncle Simon.
I think Kelsey is great in the new series but it’s missing a Niles character. His professor buddy is one of the only other actors I enjoy on the show. His son isn’t doing it for me.
I didn’t care for the new Freddy either. They need to write much better lines for him and he needs to loosen up. A lot. So wooden.
I’m sure he’ll get better as time goes by or maybe they’ll round out his character or something? My husband and I are both super fans, so we’ll be watching no matter what. 😃😄
Well, it's kind of like going to see the Beatles and it's just Ringo.
Funny you should make that comparison....they've just released a "new" Beatles song with just Paul and Ringo...
As much as I wanted this to succeed, I was left depressed after the first episode. Perhaps it should have gone the way of _Trapper John MD._ The M*A*S*H character, which was originally placed in a comedy set during the Korean War, was then updated to current times and never tried to be a comedy but was a straight up drama. Though, I imagine that too would've garnered some backlash in these oddly less tolerant times.🤷🏼♂️
I hope your Patreon endeavor is everything you hope. Your analyses have always been enlightening and I'd love to see your take on film and TV. And while I am not in a position to join, I wish you great success.
I personally enjoyed the first episode (and the other two) and am happy Frasier is back in some form. It doesn’t have to be ‘perfect’ or reinvent the wheel, it just has to be fun and occasionally funny, and leave you smiling. And for me it does that.
Glad to hear that @@alexp601. I hope it gets better and you are one of many that continue to enjoy it.
Sadly, I had issues with the portrayal of _Freddy._ Actually, he and _David,_ both. Hopefully that will change over time. Afterall, some of my most beloved shows had problematic first seasons.
"Once youve had the best, who needs the rest?"-Betty White
90s Frasier was top notch. This revival isnt needed. Ill pass.
Smart move
I don’t hate it. I think this format of sitcom is outdated. I loved it in 90s/00s but HIMYM and Big Bang Theory showed that having an audience laughter doesn’t help but hinder a home viewer’s experience now. I believe this is why Friends knows never to do a reunion series because they would disappoint the fans.
Freddie doesn’t work because though I can believe he’s chosen a path such as Martin’s, he doesn’t have the traits I think would be present from being Lilith & Frasier’s son, as well as his own character in the original series. If David is like his parents why isn’t Freddie even a bit like his mother and/or father. There would surely be some of his former privileged habits coming up and maybe that could be fun to watch..Having Freddie fight against his early programming and Frasier’s psychiatry play a part in it. The cast are nice but like most sitcoms it feels like they’re acting to the camera rather than interacting with each other. I think early Friends and all of Frasier benefitted from great acting where the chemistry worked. You bought them as characters rather than zany people with odd speech patterns as if someone was watching.
It’s interesting to rewatch Frasier with a different perspective and seeing it as more of a view of liberal elite life (maybe some of Kelsey’s influence) where the ‘old fashioned’ cop Marty votes for a ultra conservative candidate and downplays younger generational customs. Seems much more sanitised compared to what we know today. Would be interesting if Mahoney was still here to see how Martin fit into a Trump warped America.
Agree. Freddie was a trickster, child prodigy. This Freddie, although a firefighter, is not convincing as L and F's son.
I’m hoping the eventual episode with Lilith will shine some light on how Freddie became Freddie. Maybe one of the reasons he is different is because his mom was so overbearing that he went off in a different direction. I mean, his dad was out of town practically his whole life, and if Freddie is a Crane, I’m sure as he got older he wanted to get out away from his mom, even though I’m sure he still loves her
Trump warped....four years of peace and prosperity. How ironic.
So far, everybody's too nice to each other in this new series. The old series had everybody in seething, barely repressed conflict and most of the joy was in hearing the cerebral barbs in the conversations between them. When they brought Lilith back in the new series immediately it went back to that kind of dialogue and it worked. Unfortunately, the new series hasn't got the tensions between characters that the old series had, so the opportunity for that kind of humour which was such a big part of the original is gone, and I don't see how they can get it back without these characters having a falling out. Jack Cutmore-Scott seems to have been chosen based on his looks and charm rather than comic acting ability - this is a key character and they should've chosen a character actor with a track record in comedy.
They should have just gone with Trevor Einhorn...
I like it enough so far. it has potential and needs to grow into itself, but so far I'm interested enough to see if it can do that.
I just hope it gets the chance to do that. Networks are too quick nowadays to cancel anything that's not a massive hit right out of the gate. i hope they renew for another season and give it a chance to hit its stride.
I think the young actors will be the reason the show gets canceled in episode 5 you can see the problem is with them even if the writing is not the best but frasier and alan can make it work I actually found myself having fun watching frasier and alan then the scene cut to freddy I lost interest quickly .
the question is will the writing change according to what people are saying I think not every show I watched before it gets canceled the fans always explain what’s the problem what they can change to make it better but they don’t listen they are stubborn and think they know best so let’s watch the show gets canceled after two seasons at best .
The writers are trying to force too many things too soon. The younger characters are uninteresting and out of touch with reality. Frasier is old, established and rich - of course he has no idea how the world works. The young cast could give him a reality check, but no...
Boss. It only lasted for two season but I highly recommend. Shame the show didn't get the love it deserved because it was great!
I agree. Way better than house of cards and no creepy Kevin Spacey
Frasier is a child in this new series. He has not grown at all in the last 20 years. In fact he has regressed. He is basically a rich infant not held to any sort of account by incisive witty friends. They are also children who seem to have important jobs.