‘That ’90s Show’ Is Worse Than ‘That ’70s Show’ in Every Way

Everything we can’t stop loving, hating, and thinking about this week in pop culture. [Manage newsletters]( [View in browser]( [The logo for Daily Beast's Obsessed] Everything we can’t stop loving, hating, and thinking about this week in pop culture. with Kevin Fallon Everything we can’t stop loving, hating, and thinking about this week in pop culture. with Kevin Fallon   Advertisement     New This Week - Another bad reboot. - Dream picks for the Oscars. - Keke Palmer saved my soul. - Meryl Streep! - Crucial 80 for Brady update.     That ’90s Show Upset Me Deeply There are so many [reboots](, [remakes](, and [reimaginations]( of old, once-popular TV shows that the news of yet another should hardly be news at all. Instead, it should seem somewhat inevitable. Then there was the announcement that Netflix was reviving That ’70s Show, this time [as That ’90s Show](. But the way Netflix worded this news…it was less a punch to the gut than a wrecking ball to the groin. It felt as if someone had exhumed my soul from my body, set it on fire, and then fed the ashes back to me. It was the worst possible offense anyone could commit against me: It called me old. Accompanying the announcement of That ’90s Show was this little bit of hateful information: The ’70s were as far away from the years that That ’70s Show originally aired on Fox (1998-2006) as the ’90s are from today. [Je téléphone à la police](. I need to report hate speech. It’s an upsetting introduction to a project that already invites its fair share of skepticism. Another reboot? Really? There’s so much cynicism surrounding these kinds of projects that we forget that they can actually be good. And there were parts of the premiere episode of That ’90s Show, which is now streaming on Netflix, that suggested that potential. Then there was everything else that I watched as the season continued, which was about as fresh and fly as the terms “fresh” and “fly.” Trendspotters say the ’90s are back. They aren’t talking about this. The premise of That ’90s Show is both so simple enough that it should work, but also its biggest creative obstacle—at least for fans of That ’70s Show. Eric ([Topher Grace]() and Donna ([Laura Prepon]() now have a daughter of their own, Leia (Callie Haverda), who is the same age that they were when they and their friends first started hanging out in the Formans’ basement. Leia is a standout student with a stacked résumé of extracurriculars, but with the lacking social life one might expect of a teenage girl named after a Star Wars character, whose summer plans are to go to space camp…with her father. Before the trip, the trio heads to Eric’s childhood home in Wisconsin to visit Kitty (Debra Jo Rupp) and Red (Kurtwood Smith), Eric’s parents. While there, Leia meets a local group of teens, who actually make her feel cool and like she belongs. She begs to stay with her grandparents in Wisconsin for the summer so she can hang out with her new friends. Eric and Donna agree, Kitty and Red are thrilled, and the show’s premise is put in place. Leia and her crew are the new Eric, Donna, and the gang, while Kitty and Red once again deal with wrangling a brood of teens, who spend an inordinate amount of time hanging out in their basement. At first, things are nostalgically delightful. Rupp and Smith are all-time great sitcom actors. Kitty’s bubbliness cut with a dose of acidic sarcasm continues to be comedy gold, while Smith proves why so many other sitcoms since That ’70s Show have tried (yet always failed) to replicate Red’s brute crankiness and constant exasperation. The minute they’re back on screen in the old Forman house, you’re delighted to see them. Grace’s scenes as Eric are particularly amusing, seeing how his somewhat pathetic yet self-deprecating character grew into a still kind of pathetic but much more confident husband and father. When Rupp, Smith, Grace, and Prepon are in scenes together again, That ’90s Show crackles with the same energy of the original series. It’s hardly high art—or even great comedy—but if you spent years of your life watching That ’70s Show as it aired or in its seemingly 470 rerun time slots, these scenes are great fun. A quick visit from Ashton Kutcher as Kelso and Mila Kunis as Jackie in the premiere (it’s their wedding day…again) is also a riot. For a multicam sitcom to really work, those characters need to be well-defined, and the actors’ chemistry should be a dangerously explosive cocktail. The original crew still has that. It’s a shame That ’90s Show isn’t about them. The idea of the new series is essentially to recreate every single dynamic of the original, just with new young actors playing new teen characters. It doesn’t work. As I am always saying these days, the youths are a terror. They are such a bland drip. They are the Zima of TV characters: clear, carbonated, and basically flavorless, better off forgotten. There’s a new Eric, a new Donna, a new Kelso, a new Jackie, and a much more P.C. version of a new Fez. (Don’t worry, Wilmer Valderama’s problematic—yet still quite funny—caricature returns.) It should come as no surprise that there’s not an exact replica for Hyde, the character played by Danny Masterson, who [faced trial this year]( after being [charged with the rapes]( of three women. The cast is diverse. There’s even a coming out storyline! The ’90s are so progressive! When it comes to references to the time period, they’re more corny than they are clever. A trip to Blockbuster plays a pivotal part in one episode. There are numerous jokes about flannel shirts. One character is introduced while singing along to Alanis Morissette on her Walkman. The jokes don’t hit the same way. The comedic timing is missing. Like in the original, the kids are preoccupied with smoking pot—but there’s nothing renegade seeming about it this time around. (If anything, it’s slightly disturbing; the new cast looks so young.) Cool? I’ve seen enough of these reboots to have a sense of what works about them—and what really doesn’t. Spiritual reimaginings, like [Netflix’s One Day at a Time]( or [ABC’s The Wonder Years](, that recreate the tone and ethos of the original without necessarily reviving characters or storylines are great. So too are the series that reunite the original cast and essentially mimic the same humor, themes, and vibe of the show we remember, like [Will & Grace](, [Roseanne]( (then [The Conners](), and—let’s face it, for its specific audience—[Fuller House](. There’s an exception to every rule. (The [Saved By the Bell reboot]( was perfect. I said what I said.) I’ve always been baffled by these revivals meant to appeal to a new, younger generation than those who watched the original. That ’90s Show reminds me a lot of [Girl Meets World](, the reboot of Boy Meets World that centered around Cory and Topanga’s daughter and her friends, with the original cast in supporting or merely cameo roles. The show was greenlit after a passionate fan campaign for a revival; then, when those fans tuned in, they missed those original characters and largely abandoned it. The millennials tuning into both series for nostalgia are turned off by the pandering to a different audience and miss the characters they were tuning in to really see. And the so-called new, younger viewers who these new, younger characters are supposed to appeal to have no emotional attachment to the original show, let alone any references to it. Even if they had caught That ’70s Show in reruns, they wouldn’t recognize the humor of That ’90s Show, which is much cringier and more predictable. Whichever camp you’re in, the whole thing reeks of a crass ploy by Netflix to capitalize on nostalgia, while missing entirely what it was about That ’70s Show that made it good or worth revisiting in the first place. In other words, Netflix is entirely miscalculating what the audience for this is. And if there is, it’s certainly not me, the old man silently weeping in the corner as he contemplates the evidently hundreds of years that have passed since the ’90s, softly whispering in memory of That ’70s Show, “Hello, Wisconsin…”     The Long National Nightmare of Oscar Season Is Nearly Over After a brisk 417 months, the [2022-23 award season]( is nearly coming to a close. On Tuesday morning, the Oscar nominations will finally be announced. Then it’s a short dozen or so weeks (OK, just seven) until the ceremony night. I’m being cranky about all of this, but the long march to the finish line hasn’t been without its great moments: every [Michelle Yeoh and Ke Huy Quan win](; the [Austin Butler accent discourse](; [Brendan Fraser’s emotional speeches](. Many people are saying the highlight was when Julia Roberts and I sat by each other at the Critics Choice Awards and [appeared on screen together](—a moment that changed the history of the moving image as we know it. Still, with so many award shows and critic organizations and Top 10 lists, it can be overwhelming to still have a handle on what is good or what should be rewarded. So here is my list of what and who should be nominated on Tuesday. You might call it a dream list. I call it facts. And before you protest, yes, I saw your favorite movie that you’re angry I didn’t include. I just like other things better. (Also, maybe I didn’t! There’s a lot of damned movies. Give me a break!) Best Picture: Aftersun, The Banshees of Inisherin, Elvis, Everything Everywhere All at Once, Marcel the Shell With Shoes On, Nope, RRR, Tár, Thirteen Lives, Triangle of Sadness Best Actor: Austin Butler - Elvis, Colin Farrell - The Banshees of Inisherin, Daniel Kaluuya - Nope, Paul Mescal - Aftersun, Jeremy Pope - The Inspection Best Actress: Cate Blanchett - Tár, Mia Goth - Pearl, Regina Hall - Honk for Jesus, Save Your Soul, Emma Thompson - Good Luck to You, Leo Grande, Michelle Yeoh - Everything Everywhere All at Once Best Supporting Actor: Bryan Tyree Henry - Causeway, Barry Keoghan - The Banshees of Inisherin, Ke Huy Quan - Everything Everywhere All at Once, Jeremy Strong - Armageddon Time, Ben Whishaw - Women Talking Best Supporting Actress: Hong Chau - The Menu, Kerry Condon - The Banshees of Inisherin, Dolly de Leon - Triangle of Sadness, Kate Hudson - Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery, Keke Palmer - Nope     My Recent Spiritual Healing In hindsight, it seems obvious: Listening to two gay guys who are obsessed with pop culture spend 67 minutes gushing with [Keke Palmer]( about her career and the movie industry would be the highlight of my week. Duh, a full hour with Palmer talking about anything would be revelatory. Yet I wasn’t braced for how spiritually thrilling Palmer’s episode of Las Culturistas, the podcast hosted by [Bowen Yang]( and [Matt Rogers](, would be. [Listen to it here](. She talked about fame, being a child star, what it was like to film [Nope](, giving yourself space to be and do what you need outside of others’ expectations, becoming a meme, and Avatar and James Cameron: “He needs to be stopped, y’all!” Preach, Keke! (OK, she was actually praising him. But still.) It’s been a big week for therapy-via-pop-culture for me. I’m still thinking about the moment at the Critics Choice Awards when Sheryl Lee Ralph, winning for Abbott Elementary, pointed into the camera (and vaguely at where I was sitting at the ceremony) [and said](, “People don’t have to like you. People don’t have to love you. They don’t even have to respect you. But when you look in the mirror, you better love what you see. You better love what you see!” I can’t say that I do, Ms. Ralph. But I’m damn sure gonna work on it! [Watch a clip of the speech here](.     Meryl Streep news! I am, as a human who exists, obviously thrilled by the news that Meryl Streep is joining the cast of [Hulu’s Only Murders in the Building]( for Season 3. What cracks me up, though, is the way that it was announced. The major casting announcement that Streep (73) would be joining a television series starring Martin Short (72) and Steve Martin (77) was made…on TikTok. This is not an ageist thing! I am [redacted] years old, and I do not know how to use TikTok. And, yes, I understand that co-star Selena Gomez is a huge social media star. There’s just something about it that I found funny—and in an extremely positive way. Hollywood should do more of this kind of silly stuff! [Watch it here](.     The Energy I’m Bringing to 2023 We are a mere week away from the event of our lifetimes: the release of the film 80 for Brady, in which Jane Fonda, Sally Field, Lily Tomlin, and Rita Moreno go on a madcap trip to attempt to see Tom Brady play at the Super Bowl. ([Based on a true story](!) As a gift while we wait for the film, the group gave an interview that validated everything I think and feel about the world. “I don’t really like people that much,” Lily Tomlin said. “I don’t either,” added Field. “I try to avoid them.” My legends. My friends. My spirit guides. [Watch the clip here](.     [Obsess over it!](     [See This]   - American Auto: This is a NBC sitcom starring Ana Gasteyer that didn’t get much attention in Season 1, but I found it really funny. (Tues. on NBC) - Poker Face: Natasha Lyonne does Columbo. Yes, please! (Thurs. on Peacock) - Missing: A great thriller for those who enjoy feeling intensely anxious for an extended period of time. (Now in theaters) [Skip This]   - The Real Friends of WeHo: As much of a disaster as anyone could have predicted. (Fri. on MTV) - That ’90s Show: It just made me sad. (Now on Netflix)   Like our take on what to watch? Check out our see skip newsletter! [Sign up for free](     [The logo for Daily Beast's Obsessed] [TV]( [Movies]( [Reviews]( [Previews]( [TV]( [Reviews]( [Movies]( [Previews]( [Daily Beast Obsessed Facebook]( [Daily Beast Obsessed Twitter]( [Daily Beast Obsessed Instagram](   Advertisement   Was this email forwarded to you? [Sign up here.](   [Daily Beast]( [Facebook]( [Twitter]( [Instagram]( © 2023 The Daily Beast Company LLC I 555 W. 18th Street, New York NY, 10011 [Privacy Policy]( If you are on a mobile device or cannot view the images in this message, click here to [view this email in your browser](. To ensure delivery of these emails, please add emails@thedailybeast.com to your address book. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, or think you have received this message in error, you can [safely unsubscribe](.