I’m a big fan of Frasier, I always recognized its superiority while it was on the air and collecting awards and I regretted it, although I understood it when it went off the air in 2004. Sitcoms were perfect in linear TV, with half an hour of comedic situations and laugh-out-loud gags at points certain. On digital platforms? I’m not right. I obviously binged old seasons during the pandemic as a remedy for uncertain times and perhaps some Paramount executive did the same because in 2023, after a 19-year hiatus, our fun psychiatrist is back. However, without Niles Daphne, or Roz…

Well, Frasier, who we met in Cheers as a supporting character and later returned as the protagonist in his own series, won us over in those eleven years that he was on the air. The chemistry was perfect, whether it was cast or text, it was a delight to see how perfect the harmony was. However, in this new stage, obviously knowing that it would be impossible to have John Mahoney, who passed away in 2018, but it would be important to have David Hyde-Pierce as Niles Crane since the dynamic between him and Kelsey Grammer made us believe that they really were brothers. But the actor didn’t want to return, so we have Andres Keith as David, his son who tries his best (coming close from time to time) to rescue Niles’ classic mannerisms. But I’m getting ahead of myself.

Frasier‘s “Return” season has 10 episodes, with four of them already on the platform. In it, Frasier Crane returns to Boston (where there is the bar where everyone knows his name, Cheers, but which he no longer goes to), after 11 years in Seattle and a season in Chicago (which we didn’t see). In theory, it would just be a visit, but it ends up becoming an extended stay so he can get closer to his son, Frederick (Jack Cutmore-Scott). Frederick abandoned his Psychology course at Harvard to become a firefighter, that is, instead of following the academic life of his parents and uncle, he retraces the steps of his late grandfather, Martin, who was a former police officer and suffered from the frivolities of his sophisticated sons. In theory, the elements of everything that worked in Frasier for more than a decade are there: the character’s arrogance, the intellectual conflicts, the inflated ego, the good intentions.

Critics expected less, and I had higher expectations, but the public seems to have liked it. Which I think is good, because it really feels like the door is open for Frasier‘s usual small appearances and the cast can land the jokes better. It’s a matter of time. At least, that’s my current expectation! In addition to the obstacle of the less experienced cast, this Frasier 2.0 bets on the traditional to win over a young audience, which seems a bit daring, after all, the millennial generation doesn’t seem to be very attached to nostalgia, but critics are contrary to my opinion, they think that what works is precisely the fidelity to the original formula. If sixty-year-old Frasier doesn’t seem different from the “young” one, it’s because he always had an old-fashioned soul and tastes. It seemed to me that he was without the necessary support and had never been so alone. Without the same delivery, the jokes don’t always work, at least not yet. There is potential and that’s what matters.

Pesquisar

Pesquisar