User Reviews

Is this as good as the best seasons of the original series? Of course not. Expecting that would be a fools errand. But does it have its charms? Sure.

The inversion of the original plot is a nice way to both complete Frasier's character arc, while maintaining a generally familiar dynamic.

And unlike the original, which hit the ground running from the very first episode (perhaps more so than any other show), this one does have some room for improvement. The cast is inconsistent, most notably in the questionable casting of Freddy and David. That said, Eve & Alan are both excellent.

This is television comfort food. It's not meant to be anything more than this. Some of the jokes fall flat, some don't. There is an excellent joke in the fifth episode where Alan accentuates the punchline by cracking a chestnut with a gauntlet he's accidentally gotten his hand stuck in. Moments like this have flashes of the original's brilliance, but for the most part this is a show full of smiles but not full of laughs.

If you just want to see Kelsey Grammar back in the role of Fraiser, and can stomach the idea that nothing will ever match the original, then the show is well worth a watch.

I really enjoyed this pilot. I was afraid it wouldn't be good and as Frasier is one of my favorite shows I was quietly dreading this premier. To my surprise it was a sweet and promising start. Kelsey Grammer slips right back into the role he is most famous for without missing a beat.

The rest of the cast thus far is a bit of a mixed bag but I will give them time to grow and see if they can hook me. The only major criticism I have is that they need to lose the laugh track. Such an outdated technique and it really needs to stop being utilized.

I can't wait to see where the series goes and to see what legacy characters show up.

It's a slightly shaky seven-out-of-ten for the Frasier re-boot. The new concept seems solid, the writing is clever enough and Kelsey Grammar has still got it. The other positives are Jack Cutmore-Scott as Frasier's son, Freddy, and Anders Keith as Niles' son, David. Each instantly clicks in the roles and each can deliver both comedy and pathos. I'm less sure about Nicholas Lyndhurst as Frasier's friend, Alan. I can't see Lyndhurst and Grammar being as hilarious a pairing a Grammar and David Hyde Pierce. But time will tell. And for me Toks Olagundoye just didn't really gel as Olivia, and she certainly couldn't handle the zingers written for her. There was also some rather forced plotting (even for a sitcom) - like every character turning up for Frasier's dinner with Freddy. It was the kind of contrived development that the original Frasier would either have avoided or handled with considerably more aplomb. Overall, though, not a bad start. Fingers crossed.

Early days but it's already suffering the fate of nearly all reboots of previously successful shows..living up to your own standards!

The original series was one of the best TV had to offer, winning so many awards to prove it, competing with that is going to be next to impossible. So the question then becomes WHY would you want to try?

It has its moments for sure and compared to much of the detritus currently being aired it doesn't take a lot to rise above them but you're NOT them..you have a pedigree ..a history to live up to!

The temptation to simply turn this off and go watch re-runs of the original to remind yourself just how good that really was..maybe too great..!

Edit: After season finale.. The kindest way to frame it..might be to consider this reboot as a 10 episode Epilogue, in the vein of .. I wonder what ever happened to ole' Frasier..well now we know and it's time to close the book!

At first I was a bit on the fence. I wasn't a fan of Freddy or Eve but after about the 5th episode, I've come to accept the casting and maybe even like them.

The episodes have been getting funnier and funnier each week. Frasier is his same old hilarious self. The misunderstandings are great and the jokes work more than majority of the time. I am really happy with the revival and get excited each week for a new one.

I love Alan as a character and enjoy that they are giving him more things to do. David is really funny to me but they haven't found enough for his character yet.

I see so many complaints that Frasier wont attend Cheers, and frankly, I'm glad he won't. It's a new show with a new story and I hope they continue with what they are doing

Highly recommend.

It's a shame they only ran this for 10 episodes, it's not enough to get into the characters and the writers to get into the groove of the Fraiser universe. For a situation comedy (ie sitcom) there are barely any situations they get into, in trying to be so modern and hip they seem to have abandoned the tried and true laughs that come from awkwardness. Fraiser is trying to be more serious, less flashy and refined, less selfish & doesn't chase stardom anymore. Stop it. We want to see Frasier grow into something better, but along the way we have to see him always take low road, always be a snob & always have to apologize. Ask yourself: is this scene about a situation Fraiser has got himself in? Is the situation funny and relatable? If not, skip it. For example, one of the few good situations: Frasier & Freddy have blind dates but don't know if the first woman is for which guy... that's a great situation and a lot of funny jokes came from it. Bad example: the British guy gets a knight armor arm stuck on his hand... and that's it... he does nothing with it, had to explain nothing... all he does is wave a couple times. That's not a situation and it's not funny. Too often here we have Fraiser being serious like Martin was in the other series... he can't be that serious... the main character has to be light and fun, only the side characters can bring him back down to Earth. As far as casting: they did a great job. Every actor is funny & doing their all. I personally would have combined the British guy and the Dean woman into one character... because neither are interesting or funny enough to have as much time as they do. Freddy is wonderful & the neighbor has possibilities. I absolutely love David, his lines have made me laugh more than any other. It's a good show, just needs more zaniness and lightheartedness. It needs 22 eps a season. It needs to focus on a few of the characters more & the settings need a pick up of life. Fraiser has no motivation in career and life any more, no struggle. The family dynamic is only part of it.

I admit I was a little disappointed to not see my old favorite characters at first. But after watching the first three episodes I think it might be a good thing to start over fresh instead of trying to recreate something we've all already seen. (I'm also holding out hope that we might at least get a cameo from some old favorites.) I genuinely laughed a lot and particularly enjoyed the gorgeous sets and wardrobe. Frasier still has that thing where he can just set his face into a particular expression and make me laugh without even having to speak.

I'm going to give it a chance because even if it's a little awkward at first, as most new sitcoms are, I can see the potential for better things to come.

Now that I've seen all the episodes, here's my updated review:

Positives: 1. Frasier (Kelsey Grammer) is still enjoyable to watch. Besides him, Alan's character is really good, and as you continue watching, you'll start liking other main characters, though the side characters still need improvement.

2. The setting in Boston adds excitement as the Cheers cast may appear sooner or later.

Negatives: 1. Lilith's guest appearance episode was good, but in the final episode with Roz, they treated her like a small actor, not giving enough screen time, which was really sad.

2. The best thing about Cheers and the original Frasier was the romantic tension between Sam and Diane, and Niles and Daphne. In this show, they're trying to do something similar with Eve and Freddy, but it won't be that great.

3. The starting few episodes, especially the second one, are not good. It was almost unwatchable; the repeated laughter track and hooting, even when nothing is funny, were really annoying.

Despite the disappointing start, and my initial desire to skip this show after the first two episodes, I decided to give it another chance because "Cheers" is one of my all-time favorite shows, and the original "Frasier" is as well. So, having watched all the episodes, this show started improving after the fifth episode. Despite a few bad episodes and excessive laughter track usage, it still has potential and could really improve in the future. If it gets renewed for a second season, they must find better writers, increase guest appearances, and rework the entire theme and setup.

I only watched the first episode but think it has potential to get better as it goes along but I didn't love or hate it. I don't mind that the cast from the previous Frasier aren't in this because after all, when Fraiser premiered in 1993 no one from Cheers went with him, so it's the same setup again.... Frasier with all new characters. It worked back then, so why shouldn't it work again now?

The new characters seem a bit one dimensional but will hopefully find their footing within the next few episodes. The one character I really didn't like though was Niles and Daphne's son. I forgot what his name was, but he's annoying as hell and seems like he's overacting his part. He also acts more like a caricature than a real person and I found him unfunny. His character reminded me of the goofy guy from Big Bang Theory. Tone him down and make him act more like a human being than a parody of whatever it is he's parodying or cut him loose.

The rest of the cast seems ok and didn't annoy me and the writing is good, though not nearly as good as the first Frasier was, but with time that could get better also.

I found it weird how Frasier just bought his son's whole apartment building, took the apartment across the hall from him and basically blackmailed his son to move into the apartment with him or stay in his own place and pay rent.

Was the building even for sale? And how did he just buy it so quickly? In a place like Boston, a whole apartment building would go for well over a million bucks. I guess hes going to play Mr. Roper to all the other tenants? I joke but I actually think it could make for good Fraiser situations.

I doubt this will be as great as the '93 Frasier, but I do believe it has potential to still be a fun sitcom and i'm curious to see where it goes from here.

One thing I wish they did was have Frasier have a child from Charlotte who would've been a younger brother or sister for Freddy, but I guess they preferred to go with that atrocious cousin for him instead. I half expected him to rapidly knock on a door and say "Penny" repeatedly. 6/10.

I love the original Frasier show. It was excellent, smart writing and genuine laughs.

Fast forward to this show and I immediately noticed it felt different - a LOT different. From the get go, this show feels like a sitcom from the 70s or 80s with the absolutely dreadful cheap laugh tracks and quick-fire predictable "jokes" that happen every 5 seconds. Then there's the writing, so far it has zero of the flair from the original. Frasier doesn't quite *act* like the Frasier we all know. The nephew, professors and Frederick all feel like placeholders for quick-fire cheap and tired jokes.

But then...it gets serious, maybe a little too serious, but answers some important questions we were all thinking.

Then finally, it has a short build up of how Frasier plans to stay.

There's potential for later episodes to tone down the cheese sitcom feel to it. But overall this first episode was good/bad. Bad mostly wins out but the serious part gives me hope for great writing like that in future episodes, so it gets a 5/10.

I watched the original Frasier for the first time this past year. I loved it! As I watch the first and second episode of this new series, I am pleasantly surprised. It's fun to see Frazier as an older man and the new characters, I feel, are going to be a good addition to his character. It will just take a while to get to know all of them, but they are funny and seem to mesh well together. (Alan's crankiness and his banter with Olivia will be humorous.) This show is endearing because of the way they reference its history. I even got a little weepy during the first episode. (Seeing both Daphne and Niles in David is fun!)

I am a huge fan of the original Frasier and still watch from time to time. It will be remembered as one of the greatest sitcoms for decades to come.

I was eagerly awaiting the reboot. KG has stepped back into Frasier's shoes with ease, which is not surprising since he's done so across five decades. His presence as Frasier is still commanding, his delivery is on point, and he seems to be having a good time (e.g. He's not phoning it in.)

The first couple of episodes did not wow me BUT I am now looking forward to a new episode each week. The most recent episode's plot, around the blind dates, could have easily been in the original show between Frasier and Martin. I can see it.

It made me laugh out loud several times.

The "I've still got it" line from Frasier is spot on. Loved the episode.

I am also enjoying the new characters, especially David, Niles's and Daphne's son. He's adorably awkward.

I also love the nods to the original show that you can notice in multiple episodes.

Give it a chance. I think they're finding their groove. I'm cheering for their success with this one.

The ONLY good thing about this is Kelsey Grammer. Everything else is just abysmal. Nicholas Lyndhurst, while funny in OFAH, just doesn't sit well in this. The rest of the acting is just plain dire. I have no idea who any of these other actors are, but they're bottom of the ladder bad. As is the script. It just isn't funny and comes across as a cheap stage play with the worst kind of canned laughter thrown over at every opportunity. No Niles, Frasier's sidekick and who the majority of humour was bounced between in the original series. I really was hoping for good things with this reboot, but sad to say it belongs in the bin and it taints the memory of what was an excellent sitcom back in the day.

I watched the first episode and thoroughly enjoyed it. Nicholas Lyndhurst was always a favorite British comedy actor of mine and he shines so well in this show. I'm not as familiar as the other performers besides Kelsey but they will continue to create chemistry in time and develop. The jokes are very witty and dry, with plenty of good laughs. If this first episode is any indication of the rest, I'm really looking forward to exploring more of Frazier's continued journeys. And as others have said the original cast members aren't in there (a few may show up later as guests), but just embrace these newer folks and you'll be in for a treat. I adored the original series and so far this one looks quite promising.

Three episodes in, I think it's a good start overall. I've had some laughs, which is a rarity for most modern comedy shows.

What I like:

• Kelsey Grammer immediately and confidently embodies Frasier. What a fantastic actor, from comedy to the more dramatic moments. You just believe the man IS Frasier.

• I like that the styling (intro, fonts, etc.) resembles the original but with a modern touch.

• Love that they have a variation on the closing theme.

• I enjoy most of the supporting characters.

• It does not try to be woke. No forced in social justice lines.

Could be better:

• In the original show, Frasier's apartment was a character in itself. I don't get this feeling with his new apartment. I feel they should have taken us along more with Frasier in the decorating process.

• I like most supporting characters; Alan Cornwall is pretty funny. David Crane is hit and miss. Sometimes he's funny, sometimes just awkward.

• I do miss the snobby and rival kind of relationship dynamic between Frasier and Niles.

In closing: these are just my first impressions. I believe it's way too early to call the revival a success or a failure. Calling that out now would, in my opinion, mean you haven't given it an honest chance.

Definately watchable. 1st ep a bit, we'll see, but moved on nicely for the next 2. Belt fed all 3,could have watched a 4th. That's a good thing right? Laughs? No. Chuckles? Yep. Subconscious grin? Yep. That's good enough right?

Do not recall falling out of my chair or wetting myself with the original, similar reaction if I watch a re-run, tbh, can't recall if I watched the 90s run. In my 20s and a grunt in the Army in the 90s. Was either out bush or doing other unmentionable things, usually pi**ing away a paypacket at night in the company of strumpets. BTW, didn't watch Seinfeld then either. Appreciate both these shows more these days in my 40s & 50s.

Anyway, is it the original? No. Same cast? No. As good? Probably not.

Worth watching? So far yes. Giggles and chill? Definately. Easy viewing, definately takes the edge off. And these days, I don't mind a bit of that.

Gave it an 8. Maybe a solid 7. Definately no less than a safe 6. Pick your flavour it's in amongst those somewhere.

As good as it was, I think the original 'Frasier' declined in its final years, with the finale never really feeling quite 'final'.

With Kelsey Grammer's post 'Frasier' tv shows never lasting very long (though I still like 'Back to You' to this day) it seemed more of a case of when rather than if 'Frasier' would return one day.

This is the result.

To be fair, it's not bad at all, and I think in time will only grow into itself. Grammer is on good form and rejuvenated in the lead role, and in Nicholas Lyndhurst (sitcom royalty here in the UK from his time in 'Only Fools') has very strong support.

People have moaned that none of the original supporting cast are along for the ride, but I think this actually works to this reboot's advantage.

It feels like Frasier Crane's third act, that we began the journey with him on all the way back in 'Cheers'. The fact that he is now in the 'Martin' role, trying to connect with Freddy his son gives the show a nice bit of symmetry, and there are enough nods both in terms of references and plots to original series, so that it doesn't feel like 'Joey' where the character's prior journey was ignored.

Time will tell how long this third act lasts, but the promise/potential is there.

Let's tackle the elephant in the room first: John Mahoney, David Hyde-Pierce, Jane Leeves and Peri Gilpin can't be replaced. That classic Frasier is gone, but available in reruns.

The good news is, this new Frasier is pretty good. Kelsey Grammar is in top form, and the writing doesn't let him, or us, down. Nicholas Lyndhurst (of 'Only Fools and Horses' fame) is on board as a comedic foil. Jack Cutmore-Scott, another Brit, plays Frasier's son and is also meant to be the new Martin Crane. Whilst nephew, David Crane (Anders Keith), is meant to fill the role of Niles. Eve (Jess Salgueiro) is sort of Roz. The weak link in this cast is Olivia, played by Toks Olagundoye.

We have a new bar/hangout, with a cast of interesting characters, and Frasier has a new job teaching at Harvard, which will be the new radio station.

I was very trepidatious that what I was about to watch would pale in comparison to one of the greatest comedy series' of all time, but I was happily wrong. I now have a new series to look forward to every week.

Like most everyone, I loved the original "Frasier" and had hoped this new one would be a great follow up. Alas, however, in my opinion the casting was off. Kelsey Grammer as Frasier is still great, but the dynamic that existed between himself, his father and Miles his brother, could not be beat. I know others have come up with alternate storylines and I have one myself; that his father Martin had an affair, while temporarily separated from their mother and, unbeknownst to him, had a child who comes to find him in adulthood, but instead finds Frasier. The story would go on to reveal that the sibling is a male who also grew up to became a psychiatrist and is an awfully lot like Niles.

The actor who is portraying Freddy was miscast I believe. His acting seems wooden and unbelievable and there's nothing appealing about him. Plus the storyline about him being a firefighter is hard to believe because he sure is around a lot and unless he's always on his days off, it looks like he never works. There's just no chemistry between he and Frazier. I don't want anything good to happen for him, because he seems like a guy I would stay away from in real life.

The other characters have no charisma either. It's sad that no one from the old show couldn't come back to bring some of the old spark back. I really did want this one to work.

I'm an enormous fan of the original Frazier, it is one of the finest sit-coms ever, the writing and acting was second to none.

Admittedly only 2 episodes of this sequel have aired so far and I'll give it the benefit of the doubt for a few more but thus far I'm not impressed at all.

Things that need to improve, fast:

• Niles and Daphne's son isn't a character, he's a poor pastiche.

• the Dean of the school is a cliche and in this instance is neither used to deliver comedy or as a straight-man to bounce jokes off.

• the character played by Nicholas Lyndhurst has very few jokes and is again another lazy cliché.

• the premise of Frazier taking a job and buying a building feels forced and is a regurgitation of the original premise.

• the son character immediately jumped into "feelings" with zero comedy value.

• Frazier has lost his angst, his blundering despite best efforts, his effete snobbery has been removed. All the stuff that made him funny.

Cheers and Frazier had an edge to them, they were that sharp, slightly mean. This feels like an ABC early evening overly sanitised American 'comedy' that people may like but never really laugh at. So far this is very 2020s, there's nothing to laugh at.

It's a reboot but only Kelsey Grammer is from the old Frasier show but he is the main character and he still got the acting chops. There is Rodney from Only fools and Horses and couple of new faces as supporting cast. They are ranging from great to solid.

Ultimately it only matters if the comedy show makes you laugh and this did several times in each episodes, the comedy is very much similar to the old show, so if you didn't like that one you won't like this one. It's not quite exactly the same but the spirit is very similar.

Hopefully it's going to be many episodes and isn't just a few episodes.

This has so potential but the writers are just not that great on this. I hate to say it because I know they're just doing a job but everything seems Forced, the jokes aren't funny. It has so much great potential though I think they need to bring on some better writers to make this Next season pop.

The original Fraser, from the very first episode, was unbelievably amazing, introducing the cast was seamlessly done. Not a big fan of the neighbor with the baby. I don't really think she adds anything to the show. She's a great actress, but the show doesn't move well with that character.

I've had maybe one or two laugh out loud moments, but the rest of it was just ehhh.

Better writing and better character development in my opinion will fix the show.

I've watch both of the first two episodes and all I can say it, "Yawn".

The writing is just abysmal and even Grammar, who is a top-tier performer, can't manage to deliver the laughs. Never mind the rest of the cast, who are absolutely awful. Seriously. Just awful. Not one of the supporting cast had any of the needed vibe with Grammer to pull off the "funny" like the old cast did. It's just all so flat.

To put lipstick on this pig, they tried the canned laughter track. So obviously disingenuous, and so very loud as if to to say, "See, it's funny 'here' so you should laugh".

I didn't really have high hopes but any that I did have was dashed almost instantly. I don't know where all the high ratings are coming from but if this what what so many others think is great entertainment, I guess I must be from a different planet.

I was hesitant. I mean, how can you follow the brilliant show FRASIER? Kelsey Grammar has done a brilliant job here. The right actors, the right mood, the perfectly written script, and the stellar acting. I can't recommend this show enough. Fantastic show. They managed to weave in the new characters so easily, and Freddy is brilliant. As is David, as Niles and Daphne's son who has come to Boston to attend Harvard. Freddy and David could not be more different. Freddy is reminiscent of Martin, with his earthy humor and his non-pretentious airs. David is much like Niles, somewhat prissy and naive, but also a bit like Daphne, sweet natured and child-like.

I highly recommend this show!