Back to You : Season 1

  • Network:
  • Series Premiere Date: Sep 19, 2007
Season #: 1, 2
Back to You Image
Metascore
58

Mixed or average reviews - based on 27 Critics What's this?

User Score
5.5

Mixed or average reviews- based on 41 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring: , ,
  • Summary: Kelsey Grammer's back on TV, this time as an anchorman returning to Pittsburgh after an on-air incident ruins his career in LA.
  • Genre(s): Comedy
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 12 out of 27
  2. Negative: 4 out of 27
  1. Reviewed by: Ken Tucker
    83
    I'd rather just watch Grammer and Heaton trade barbs in the newsroom. [21 Sep 2007, p.71]
  2. Reviewed by: Troy Patterson
    80
    Back to You doesn't have a mandate to be inventive--to try new comedic beats or to attempt daring flights of absurdity. It just needs to be uninventive in a snappy way, a feat readily accomplished.
  3. Grammer and Heaton slip easily into characters who won't be easily mistaken for Frasier Crane or Debra Barone, the writing's professional, the supporting cast dependable (and in the case of Fred Willard, another "Raymond" veteran, dependably hilarious).
  4. Absolutely nothing about it is original or seeks to transform the half-hour genre. Still, the fact that it is executed by sure-footed comedy veterans more than makes up for the sin of familiarity.
  5. Three sitcom veterans can elevate comfortable mediocrity only so high. There's probably not one setup, premise or joke that you haven't seen before (or will see coming) in the entirety of your sitcom-watching life.
  6. You have to admire Kelsey Grammer and Patricia Heaton for holding up their end of the bargain, even if the material in their show, Back to You, is such a drop from "Frasier" and "Everybody Loves Raymond"
  7. Back to You stinks, shames the sitcom form, is written and directed with smelly gusto, and is not original, funny or redemptive by any universal standards known to science, creation or TV executives.

See all 27 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 34
  2. Negative: 15 out of 34
  1. ThomasH.
    Feb 12, 2008
    10
    Excellent, fresh, and imaginative. This show has definate potential. Good to see Kelsey Grammer back on the box :)
  2. StantinoH
    Sep 22, 2007
    10
    Very clever, great interaction , great supporting cast. It's a keeper.
  3. BigJ
    May 4, 2008
    9
    Very funny show. Much better now than at the beginning of the series
  4. EdgarC.
    Sep 26, 2007
    5
    It's not "Frasier", it sure as heck isn't "Raymond", so what is it? It's a mediocre blend of two big names from television It's not "Frasier", it sure as heck isn't "Raymond", so what is it? It's a mediocre blend of two big names from television coming together to make a mediocre show. It may have just been the pilot, but it seemed more crude than funny. Expand
  5. JeremyS.
    Oct 4, 2007
    3
    Why didn't Frasier just do his TV show in SF and just continue where he left off. Okay so he wanted a change, but from excellent to Why didn't Frasier just do his TV show in SF and just continue where he left off. Okay so he wanted a change, but from excellent to crap! Big shame. Expand
  6. SamW
    Oct 11, 2007
    2
    Wow, this show is a waste of time. Grammer saves it from being a zero. We can now see that Patricia Heaton is nothing without Ray Romano and Wow, this show is a waste of time. Grammer saves it from being a zero. We can now see that Patricia Heaton is nothing without Ray Romano and that cast from "Raymond". I think that most of the shows humor is written for 10 year old boys. I gave it 3 episodes, that was 2 too many ! Expand
  7. JeffS.
    Sep 21, 2007
    0
    I quit on this show forever after ten minutes, it making me long for the golden sitcom days of Wings and Cybil.

See all 34 User Reviews