Sure, but it would have been an entertaining disaster. The question is whether them running a theater is just the plot of a single episode or if it could have sustained the entire series.
That’s what I would ask. Their restaurant crashed and burned on opening night, and they couldn’t finish even one chapter of the book they were going to write. The list went on and on.
Funny stuff for a half hour here and there, but it would get old pretty fast.
Maybe they planned on a series of guest stars. ("Niles, good news and bad news: Bette Midler has agreed to a part in ‘Fiddler’ - IF she can first play ‘Laura’ in ‘The Glass Menagerie’!). They got a lot of mileage out of the radio station setting in the original series, what with a ‘ragtag band of misfit co-workers’ to liven things up.
I just heard a review on NPR’s Fresh Air. Like most of us, he was unimpressed by the first two episodes. But he gave it a positive review overall, because unlike us regular people critics got early access to the first five episodes, and in his opinion the show does eventually find its footing in those later episodes.
I can see that that as Ep 3 was pretty decent and gives some light on what Frasier has been up to and how he made his money.
Episode 3 was no worse than the previous 2. Possibly a tiny bit better.
Three was better. Still reserving judgement.
I thought 3 was much worse than the first two.
The show is still in the introduction/exposition stage. You’ll notice Freddie had a smaller part this episode (although David had a bigger part, which I consider a net loss.) At least we now know that Frasier was a fabulously successful TV shrink, so we don’t have to debate where his money came from.
If they do the teaching scenes right it could really bring out the obnoxious and condescending, yet somehow still caring personality we’re used to.
I’m still holding the door open for this show. Agree with many of the comments here. Grammer himself is still great, however, the majority of supporting cast is subpar (although Nicholas Lyndhurst is an exception that proves the rule).
Yes, we’re still in the exposition stage of the show’s development, but I am convinced the show would have been a resounding success if David Hyde Pierce had been a part of it, without his participation, the enterprise remains in doubt.
I watched the free first episode. I won’t watch another. The magic is gone and I don’t see it returning.
The original Frasier was a brilliant ensemble show, where Grammer’s character was balanced by the others, especially Niles. Their witty and hilarious interactions were the highlight of the show.
It was a mistake to make this new series without bringing back at least a couple original characters, especially Niles. I could see a new show focusing on mature Frasier and Niles dealing with today’s issues and their [re-cast] kids possibly working…with a good director and writers of course.
a very cute puppy dog this week.
i’m a bit confused by david. are they going for an estrangement? or his parents aren’t around because they are in seattle? that wasn’t very clear.
He’s a college freshman. Not surprising that he’s living away from his parents.
Some of it was better in the latest episode, some of it was not. Why hasn’t Frasier gone to Cheers or even mentioned it? Surely Freddie told his mother about the recent events so why no word from her?
This episode was better, with good development between Frasier and Freddie, and a nice boost from Eve. But Alan is only good for exposition, Olivia hasn’t been good for anything, and David shouldn’t be in Harvard, much less in the cast of a TV show.
At this point all I can figure is that the producers are deliberately making an effort to make all the firefighters good and everyone associated with Harvard an idiot.
The writing is standard sitcom fare, the acting - aside from Kelsey Grammer - is sub-par and often excruciating to watch, and the juiced-up canned laughter is extremely annoying, even insulting.
As much as I love the original “Frasier”, I am done with this sorry mess.
mmm
I did enjoy it quite a bit. The whole thing with Frasier crying and it was from the chili rather than being afraid Freddie was going to die was hilarious. I also did like the whole David being confused for an orphan plotline.
Though my favorite bit was probably that the firefighters were a super knowledgable bunch.
Well in the original Frasier, the show definitely sided with Martin and Daphne. Though the Philosophers were about to win the trivia game when Frasier decided to go on an exposition heavy answer as opposed to ringing in - forgetting that his son may know a bit about wine due to his upbringing.
It’s a ten episode run, we’ve already seen four of them, and there’s almost no new TV being shown right now. I can afford to give it another three hours this fall to see if something good happens.
Peri Gilpin as Roz is listed to appear in the upcoming episode “Reindeer Games,” so you could just tune in for that one.
Maybe. But honestly, she wasn’t exactly among my favorite Frasier characters.
mmm
I’ve only seen the previews. you can’t sit on that couch in jeans
Anyone else disappointed that Frasier has terribly regressed? Frasier changed during the show. Roz and his Dad called him out on pretentious attitudes.
Fraiser had come to accept the recliner and beer cans in his apartment.
I liked Fraiser in the later seasons. He was warmer and more empathetic. He had some touching scenes with his dad.
Now he’s snooty again?
I’m debating about watching the reboot. I liked Fraisers life at the end of the series. I can see him moving to another city and making new friends. Does he have to be a elitist again?
The Fraiser in that preview reminds me of the guy in Cheers. Before he cared for his disabled dad.