So Is Frasier Revival Good or Disastrously Bad? It's Complicated
Opinions are divided. Let's see what the critics have to say.
The Frasier reboot has finally landed. Like all comebacks, it was highly anticipated and split opinion even before it hit our screens. Some were excited, others thought the show had run its course and should be left in the past.
So how has the revival been received?
Mixed reviews
The reviews are mixed, but oddly enough many of those who have expressed an opinion either really love it or really hate it. I'm sure some people are so-so about it. But their views are not coming through in any of the online forums.
The case for
Writing in The Guardian, Lucy Mangan said 'Kelsey Grammer is as perfect as ever'. She described the first few weeks of the show as a 'struggle', but said that after a few weeks 'the chemistry and magic are back'.
Nick Curtis of the Evening Standard agrees. He wrote that the show 'captures the spark of the original'. In his view, Grammer retains his 'immaculate comic timing' and the 'quantity and quality of the verbal and physical gags... remains reassuringly high'.
The case against
As you might expect, not everyone agrees. The Independent's Nick Hilton described the new-look Frasier as 'an unsettling collision of Nineties sitcom tropes and present-day sensibilities' and said 'none of the new stuff in this reboot really works'.
As for The New York Times, reviewer James Poniewozik didn't hold back, describing the show as 'Tossed, Scrambled and Eggscruciating'.
The balanced view
Ben Travers of Indie Wire may have summed it up best when he wrote that the new show is 'decent by revival standards, but suffers by comparison' with the original.
In the end, the only way to judge is to give it a go. If you're going to watch the reboot, it makes sense to follow Lucy Mangan's advice and give it a few episodes before deciding whether it's a show you can get on board with.
No matter how open-minded you are as a viewer, your mind will always be comparing it to the original. Niles will be noticeably absent, and you'll have to remind yourself that Nicholas Lyndhurst isn't just Rodney Trotter.
If you can get past these factors and see it as a show in its own right, rather than a watered-down version of a nineties favourite, you may find yourself drawn in and enjoying it.
Source: The Guardian, Evening Standard, The Independent, New York Times.