Frasier - Page 5 - Blu-ray Forum

Zechs Merquise · 10-09-2023, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benoit Blanc

'Frasier' Revival Is an Unfunny, Uninspired Dud

https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movi...us-1234841497/

What a shock

spider-neil · 10-10-2023, 05:11 AM

That’s disappointing but I will still watch it myself and form my own opinion.

Zechs Merquise · 10-10-2023, 07:06 AM

As will I but I suspect my opinion will end up being fairly close to the Rolling Stone reviewer's

sandboxgamer · 10-10-2023, 11:54 AM

Sweet Jesus, this looks awful. Good for David Hyde Pierce for not coming back as Niles. He knew this was going to be a trainwreck. R.I.P. John Mahoney and Moose and Enzo thank god you didn’t have to see this travesty.

principehomura · 10-11-2023, 08:38 AM

I'm still hoping it was just the trailer to be bad

Benoit Blanc · 10-11-2023, 01:58 PM

The one criticism I don't get is how Frasier's not consistent with the Frasier of the original Frasier. Hello? The Frasier of the original Frasier wasn't consistent with the Frasier of the original Cheers! He was a lot more laid back and less uptight in Cheers than he ever was in Frasier, he enjoyed sports and played golf, and, oh, what am I forgetting? Oh yes, HIS FATHER WAS DEAD!

Quote:

Originally Posted by principehomura

I'm still hoping it was just the trailer to be bad

Did you watch this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benoit Blanc

Frasier | Inside The Series | Paramount+ - YouTube

Zechs Merquise · 10-11-2023, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benoit Blanc

The one criticism I don't get is how Frasier's not consistent with the Frasier of the original Frasier. Hello? The Frasier of the original Frasier wasn't consistent with the Frasier of the original Cheers! He was a lot more laid back and less uptight in Cheers than he ever was in Frasier, he enjoyed sports and played golf, and, oh, what am I forgetting? Oh yes, HIS FATHER WAS DEAD!

Yeah but that's different.

Frasier in Cheers was a sort of one dimensional caricature of a character, made to fit into the ensemble cast of Cheers. To make Frasier work in Frasier they needed to make considerable revisions to the character to make him viable as a lead in his own TV series. This new iteration isn't a spin-off, it's a continuation. We're supposed to believe this is just the old show picking up where it left off twenty years ago. It should be the same old Frasier, just older.

Martoto · 10-11-2023, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zechs Merquise

Yeah but that's different.

Frasier in Cheers was a sort of one dimensional caricature of a character, made to fit into the ensemble cast of Cheers.

That covers only the first three or four episodes he was in during the second season. Just the tip of the Frasier-in-Cheers iceberg. If he hadn't been a fully dimensional character already when Cheers ended, Frasier would not have hit the ground running as it did.

Zechs Merquise · 10-11-2023, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martoto

That covers only the first three or four episodes he was in during the second season. Just the tip of the Frasier-in-Cheers iceberg. If he hadn't been a fully dimensional character already when Cheers ended, Frasier would not have hit the ground running as it did.

He was never in the second season

Fact is Frasier in Cheers was a 'flatter' character than he was in Frasier. The writers changed almost everything about him for Frasier because the Frasier that was in Cheers wouldn't have worked in Frasier. The revisionism and ignorance of Frasier backstory and subtle nuances are more unforgiveable here in this continuation because the group dynamics aren't supposed to be different at all, even if the characters are different. You've still got your working class relative at odds with Frasier's upper class pomposity, you've still got your 'best friend' character split with your equally pretentious relative characters, and I assume the two women are supposed to be analogues of Roz and Daphne. The group dynamics haven't changed, so any changes to the character are really just a sign of poor and/or lazy writing

Martoto · 10-11-2023, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zechs Merquise

He was never in the second season

Fact is Frasier in Cheers was a 'flatter' character than he was in Frasier. The writers changed almost everything about him for Frasier because the Frasier that was in Cheers wouldn't have worked in Frasier.

Oh jeez. Third season. We only got nine years of character development instead of ten.

They did not change everything. (Except for his parents. Sort of.) It just so happens that one show is called Cheers and one show is called "Frasier". Go figure. One of those shows features an even more developed version of the character.

It is just ridiculous to claim that Frasier was one dimensional in Cheers.

Zechs Merquise · 10-11-2023, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martoto

They did not change everything

They did, pretty much. Frasier in Cheers never mentioned coming from Seattle. He never mentioned having a brother. His mother was alive (and a completely vindictive woman), his father was dead (and a research scientist). He worked in private practice and never showed any inclination towards 'show business'. He had a wife and a son.

While they smoothed out some of these details over time on Frasier, the character on Fraiser was, for all intents and purposes, a completely different character with the same name and the same 'core' characterisation (he's a pompous, pretentious, upper class intellectual)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martoto

It is just ridiculous to claim that Frasier was one dimensional in Cheers.

Compared to his characterisation in Frasier, yes he was.

Martoto · 10-11-2023, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zechs Merquise

They did, pretty much. Frasier in Cheers never mentioned coming from Seattle. He never mentioned having a brother. His mother was alive (and a completely vindictive woman), his father was dead (and a research scientist). He worked in private practice and never showed any inclination towards 'show business'. He had a wife and a son.

He also had a dog or a cat offscreen. These are background details. Trivia. And not what gave the character in cheers the dimensions he carried over and were added to by a supporting cast of characters that revolved around him. Rather than mere props which was all Cheers could accommodate.

If he was a different "character" then the show would not have hit the ground running as it did.

Benoit Blanc · 10-11-2023, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zechs Merquise

Yeah but that's different.

Frasier in Cheers was a sort of one dimensional caricature of a character, made to fit into the ensemble cast of Cheers. To make Frasier work in Frasier they needed to make considerable revisions to the character to make him viable as a lead in his own TV series. This new iteration isn't a spin-off, it's a continuation. We're supposed to believe this is just the old show picking up where it left off twenty years ago. It should be the same old Frasier, just older.

Sorry but different schmifferent. Either ya keep a character consistent or ya don't. I don't care about the reasons. If ya don't keep them consistent, fine. Then if the character changes again at some point, I don't care.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zechs Merquise

They did, pretty much. Frasier in Cheers never mentioned coming from Seattle. He never mentioned having a brother. His mother was alive (and a completely vindictive woman), his father was dead (and a research scientist). He worked in private practice and never showed any inclination towards 'show business'. He had a wife and a son.

While they smoothed out some of these details over time on Frasier, the character on Fraiser was, for all intents and purposes, a completely different character with the same name and the same 'core' characterisation (he's a pompous, pretentious, upper class intellectual)
Compared to his characterisation in Frasier, yes he was.

She was vindictive, another inconsistency, but she also died offscreen during Cheers. Frasier refers to his mother being dead in S06E17 To All the Girls I've Loved Before.

buck135 · 10-11-2023, 06:43 PM

The fact of the matter is, the fans care more about the character than the writers of this reboot do. Easy pass for me.

principehomura · 10-12-2023, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benoit Blanc

The one criticism I don't get is how Frasier's not consistent with the Frasier of the original Frasier. Hello? The Frasier of the original Frasier wasn't consistent with the Frasier of the original Cheers! He was a lot more laid back and less uptight in Cheers than he ever was in Frasier, he enjoyed sports and played golf, and, oh, what am I forgetting? Oh yes, HIS FATHER WAS DEAD!

Did you watch this?

Nope, I haven't watched it yet.

Regarding the criticism of the consistency: of course now the comparison is with Frasier, and after eleven season now Cheers is out of the equation.
Usually I don't mind if there are a few adjustments here and there.
In the Roseanne revival a few characters disappeared, other came back, and I didn't mind at all.
What's important is that there are no inconsistency in the mains behaviours.

Cap.T · 10-12-2023, 12:15 PM

The first two episodes are out and I just watched them. From a story point of view, there is definitely lot's of room for improvement, though I enjoyed the second episode way more then the first a had a few good laughs and chuckles during it. The original cast if of course irreplaceable, so I'm going to wait and see how much (or not) I'm warming up to the new characters during the first season.

Form a technical point of view: The show streams in 4K Dolby Vision. For some incomprehensible reason it seems to be framed for 4:3 TV-Screens. Especially during the first episode there were constantly half heads or other body parts at the left and right edges of the 16:9-Frame visable. Highly annonying that.

Martoto · 10-12-2023, 02:14 PM

Any difference between slightly pompous but also laid back Frasier in Cheers and always pompous and less laid back Frasier in Frasier can be put down to the fact that in Cheers he was trying to integrate with the regulars at the bar. In Frasier he's a media celebrity in his home town, trying to cultivate and maintain an image. What's not laid back about Frasier singing that theme tune?

Benoit Blanc · 10-12-2023, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by principehomura

Nope, I haven't watched it yet.

Regarding the criticism of the consistency: of course now the comparison is with Frasier, and after eleven season now Cheers is out of the equation.
Usually I don't mind if there are a few adjustments here and there.
In the Roseanne revival a few characters disappeared, other came back, and I didn't mind at all.
What's important is that there are no inconsistency in the mains behaviours.

Don't find that in the least bit important myself. He changed from Cheers to Frasier, he can change from Frasier to Frasier. Either ya keep a character consistent or ya don't. If I was bothered about consistency, I'd never have watched Frasier because his dead research scientist father suddenly transformed into a breathing ex-cop.

BillieCassin · 10-12-2023, 05:12 PM

Frasier himself isn't the issue with the new show (and regardless, we've seen this same character for like 40 years now, so it would be weird if he didn't change somewhat).

The new show has just surrounded him with completely insipid, flat characters. Even the sets are bland - in the second episode, I was very confused because Frasier's apartment and his office at the school (which came pre-decorated) look the same. The way they just go back and forth in scenes between the locations doesn't help.

It's sad that almost all of these reboots just suck. It just shouldn't be so hard. It's crazy that the only one that has even remotely worked was "Fuller House", LOL.

I'll check this out again when they start bringing in the guest stars, but only out of curiosity of what they do with them, not because I think they will actually make the show overall better.

principehomura · 10-12-2023, 06:51 PM

Just saw the first episode, and damn I am impressed.
I may be the easiest viewer to win for a reboot-revival show (I had fun with all of them so far: Gilmore Girls, Conners comes to mind), but all the doubts and fears I had with the trailer disappeared by mid-episode.

It is a sitcom at the beginning: plots have to develop, character dynamics need to be created, and so I expect some rustiness here and there. This pilot of course have some.
But the first stones seems to be put in the right place, and overall it managed to be entertaining, mixing, as a good sitcom should, laughs and heart.

Objectively it was not comedy-gold, but at the very least a good start that make me feel confident for what's coming next.

Of the characters it has stricken me David doing Niles' son, it really felt like his son.
And John Mahoney tribute at the end made me shed a tear.

View Poll Results: Would you recommend this show?
Yes	28	65.12%
No	15	34.88%
Voters: 43. You may not vote on this poll

10-10-2023, 05:11 AM	#82
spider-neil Blu-ray Knight Member since:Feb 2011	That’s disappointing but I will still watch it myself and form my own opinion.

10-10-2023, 07:06 AM	#83
Zechs Merquise Special Member Member since:Oct 2012	As will I but I suspect my opinion will end up being fairly close to the Rolling Stone reviewer's

10-11-2023, 08:38 AM	#85
principehomura Power Member Top contributor Member since:Oct 2011 Location:Italy 4K collection:4 Blu-ray collection:211 DVD collection:223	I'm still hoping it was just the trailer to be bad

10-11-2023, 06:43 PM	#94
buck135 Blu-ray Samurai Top contributor Member since:Jan 2011 4K collection:433 Blu-ray collection:2386 Trading Score:11	The fact of the matter is, the fans care more about the character than the writers of this reboot do. Easy pass for me.

10-12-2023, 12:15 PM	#96
Cap.T Special Member Member since:Aug 2008 Location:Germany Trading Score:64	The first two episodes are out and I just watched them. From a story point of view, there is definitely lot's of room for improvement, though I enjoyed the second episode way more then the first a had a few good laughs and chuckles during it. The original cast if of course irreplaceable, so I'm going to wait and see how much (or not) I'm warming up to the new characters during the first season. Form a technical point of view: The show streams in 4K Dolby Vision. For some incomprehensible reason it seems to be framed for 4:3 TV-Screens. Especially during the first episode there were constantly half heads or other body parts at the left and right edges of the 16:9-Frame visable. Highly annonying that.

10-12-2023, 02:14 PM	#97
Martoto Blu-ray Duke Member since:Mar 2014 Location:Glasgow Blu-ray reviews: 7	Any difference between slightly pompous but also laid back Frasier in Cheers and always pompous and less laid back Frasier in Frasier can be put down to the fact that in Cheers he was trying to integrate with the regulars at the bar. In Frasier he's a media celebrity in his home town, trying to cultivate and maintain an image. What's not laid back about Frasier singing that theme tune?

10-12-2023, 05:12 PM	#99
BillieCassin Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Nov 2009 Blu-ray collection:- Trading Score:34	Frasier himself isn't the issue with the new show (and regardless, we've seen this same character for like 40 years now, so it would be weird if he didn't change somewhat). The new show has just surrounded him with completely insipid, flat characters. Even the sets are bland - in the second episode, I was very confused because Frasier's apartment and his office at the school (which came pre-decorated) look the same. The way they just go back and forth in scenes between the locations doesn't help. It's sad that almost all of these reboots just suck. It just shouldn't be so hard. It's crazy that the only one that has even remotely worked was "Fuller House", LOL. I'll check this out again when they start bringing in the guest stars, but only out of curiosity of what they do with them, not because I think they will actually make the show overall better.

10-12-2023, 06:51 PM	#100
principehomura Power Member Top contributor Member since:Oct 2011 Location:Italy 4K collection:4 Blu-ray collection:211 DVD collection:223	Just saw the first episode, and damn I am impressed. I may be the easiest viewer to win for a reboot-revival show (I had fun with all of them so far: Gilmore Girls, Conners comes to mind), but all the doubts and fears I had with the trailer disappeared by mid-episode. It is a sitcom at the beginning: plots have to develop, character dynamics need to be created, and so I expect some rustiness here and there. This pilot of course have some. But the first stones seems to be put in the right place, and overall it managed to be entertaining, mixing, as a good sitcom should, laughs and heart. Objectively it was not comedy-gold, but at the very least a good start that make me feel confident for what's coming next. Of the characters it has stricken me David doing Niles' son, it really felt like his son. And John Mahoney tribute at the end made me shed a tear.

Best TV Deals