charmed reboot

Charmed Update: CW Boss Says Reboot Will Be 'Standalone' Show

The CW’s in-the-works ’70s-set Charmed reboot will not have any ties to the original, beloved CW series — at least not at this time, the network’s top exec said on Sunday.

CW president Mark Pedowitz told reporters at the Television Critics Assoc. winter press tour that, “At this point, it is a self-contained, self-sustained show. There is the power of three element in there, but at this time, it is a very standalone show.”

Set nearly four decades before the original series, the quasi-prequel revolves around three witches who are brought together to fight evil in a small New England town (Read descriptions of the three new characters here). This is, of course, a stark contrast to the leading ladies of the original series, all of whom were blood-related sisters.It was also set in then-present day San Francisco. 

Three of the four original cast members threw some subtle shade at the project on social media last week, with Rose McGowan posting a cast photo with the caption, “Irreplaceable” and Holly Marie Combs simply saying, “We wish them well.”

Curiously, Pedowitz is not ruling out an appearance by one of the original stars, telling reporters, “We’ll see what happens as the series goes on.

Jane the Virgin EP Jennie Snyder Urman is shepherding the project, which is currently just at the pilot-script stage.

Comments are monitored, so don’t go off topic, don’t frakkin’ curse and don’t bore us with how much your coworker’s sister-in-law makes per hour. Talk smart about TV!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

61 Comments
  1. jmonique says:

    I think what they don’t really get is the sister aspect was a huge draw for the original.

    • Sam says:

      Exactly. This is why the original concept went from rommates in Boston to sisters very quickly when WB picked it up years ago.

      I wish they did that again.

  2. neetztalks says:

    This just reeks of fraudlent advertisting and an obvious pr stunt, if it’s not related to the halliwells or sisters or charmed, then DON’T call it a charmed reboot. 1000% disrespectful to the source material and the huge fanbase of the original who they expect to watch it. i want a revival not a reboot or at least honour shannen, holly, alyssa and rose in it. AND to include Penny and Patty (Jennifer Rhodes and Finola Hughes) because their characters would have been adults in a 1970s timeline.

    #notmyCharmedOnes

  3. Dave says:

    I need to understand if this is gonna be in the same world of the halliwell sisters or a complete new thing…I understand that the series is a stand-alone but that doesnt mean it’s not connected (all spin-off and prequels are stand alone just for the fact that they don’t depend on the events of the “mother-series”). Also, if it’s not connected in anyway I really don’t get the point of setting the story in the 70s, they could have set it nowadays with no problems declaring the series as a complete reboot of the original one

  4. Ugh, the more we hear about this, the worse it sounds. The whole point of the show was that they were sisters. Why not do it again and make them all WOC this time (with one or several gay or bi)? That’d be way more interesting than this.

  5. Gusar says:

    Why call it Charmed then? Because people talking about the show is good even when most comments are negative? All it does to me at least is make me wish that there will be a serious backlash and the show burns.
    The thing is, I would love to have a show with witches. I liked the cheesiness of Eastwick and Witches of East End was a great watch, particularly because it had the family angle. So do bring on a new witch show. Just do not call it Charmed!

  6. Eric Moler says:

    technically – Charmed was never a CW series…

  7. Craiger says:

    What about they should have had them be sisters but have them be relatives of the Charmed Ones? Then that way they could maybe have some stories where they have them travel to the future and meet the Charmed Ones?

  8. Balázs Beni says:

    F the CW, and F Pedowitz. WE DONT CARE ABOUT WHETHER IF ITS STANDALONE OR NOT, WE WANT SHANNEN, HOLLY, ALYSSA AND ROSE. THAT IS ALL

  9. Riley says:

    Rose McGowan clearly missing the irony in her proclaiming that Charmed’s characters were irreplaceable.

  10. Roddric says:

    😬😬…while I appreciate “CBS Television Studios” wanting to do something new with the “Charmed” property, as a fan I’m seriously concerned over the new storyline. At its core, the show is about family, sisters.

    The bedrock of “the power of three” relies on the three siblings coming together as one to vanquish evil.

    The original series yielded great stories and lasted EIGHT SEASONS mainly because of the family aspect.

    Hopefully “The CW” will factor this in immediately since this reboot is still in the development stages.

    • Marche' says:

      I agree Roddric….. I am also a fan that currently watch the reruns faithfully on TNT every morning. I am really not feeling the new ” Charmed” without the original Halliwell’s. Especially with the promoting an 70’s era show. Why not bring an up to date version Including the sisters and their kids? I would love to see Wyatt and Chris, since the show involved so much history of their magical up bringing.

      • Candie Marie says:

        I won’t watch it unless the originals were the stars because they all agreed to come back so this is just awful! I’m a true charmed fan and I won’t give this fake me a put a chance it will bomb just like the witches of east wick or whatever! They need to show the originals guiding the next generation not this! Hopefully they will when this bombs!

      • Melissa says:

        I agree! Doesn’t make any since to have it set in the past instead of the future with their children grown. It would make more since and carry the true charmed fans and guarantee a successful long running show.

  11. Csr says:

    Why do networks call them reboots when they have nothing to do with the original? They’re just capitalizing on name recognition.

  12. Cas says:

    I feel like everyone is making a huge deal out of this. So should we never have a medical drama since there was already Greys? Also, I don’t think that the sister aspect was a huge draw for me. Some people have friends that are like sisters.

    • Andrea says:

      @Cas, That’s not the point. No one is saying that there sound never be another show about witches or the supernatural. To use your example, Grey’s is a medical show. Code Black is a medical show, but they are two separate medical shows. Code Black has nothing to do with Greys and vice versa. In this instance, the name Charmed is being used for a new show that appears to have no ties to the Charmed story, universe, or characters. Therefore, don’t call it Charmed. Call it something like Spirits of ’76 and let it be its own series. People are objecting to the use of the Charmed name when there is no tie to the original series.

    • Luli says:

      Ohh there can be other medical shows, just as there can be witch shows…. but don’t call it a charmed reboot if its just a standalone thing, with nothing related to the original. They are just using the Charmed brand to their advantage.

  13. Butch says:

    The CW should realize that the original series tanked when they started focusing on Billie and away from the sisters.

  14. sg says:

    Sounds like it going to be similar to their Beauty and Beast “reboot”. Where the the reboot has almost nothing in common with the original except the show title, characters’ names and ripping off some of the original premise.

  15. Njc3490 says:

    This literally has NOTHING to do with Charmed- the charmed characters and mythology are so intricate you can’t just simply reboot it- and then on top of that MAKE it nothing like the original and slap the charmed name on it- it’s essentially a brand new show about witches but they want to capitalize on Charmed’s fame in the hopes fans will follow. This sounds more like a secret circle (which i loved) reboot than a Charmed one. Just call it something different since that’s what it is! It might have more success than instead of the backlash they’re getting.

    I think I’m going to make a show about a girl that sits in an office all day- she gets paper cuts ALLL the time- she bleeds and to stop the bleeding she sucks her finger dry. I shall call it.. Buffy! The whole blood sucking aspect is still there after all.

  16. Njc3490 says:

    I think I’m going to make a show about a girl that sits in an office all day- she gets paper cuts ALLL the time- she bleeds and to stop the bleeding she sucks her finger dry. I shall call it.. Buffy! The whole blood sucking aspect is still there after all.

  17. CharmedFanCH says:

    Well, well. I think, it is okay, to call it a Charmed reboot, although the characters won’t be sisters. What wonders me is, how did they come up with the ideas of setting the story line in the 70s… I mean the 70s are a crucial time for the original series, because Phoebe was born and therewith the Charmed Ones. I hope at least they build a connection to the original series and let Jennifer or Fiona star, and maybe also the Baby Charmed Ones, giving new details we don’t know yet about :) … but yes, I would prefer a Charmed Netflix revival with the four original sisters!

  18. John NYC says:

    Funny since Rose was a replacement.

  19. Agent 86 says:

    So … call it “The Craft” then. Or “Hocus Pocus”. Or “Practical Magic”. It seems to have just as much in common with all of those other witch-themed productions as it does with Charmed.
    I don’t know why they don’t just set it in the 60s and make Penny one of the lead characters. If Penny wrote (most of) the Book of Shadows, then she would make a decent character to follow. And it allows for a logical connection to the original series, with the possibility of guest appearances from the original cast thanks to time travel magic.

  20. Fernanda says:

    is this an excuse to see a time travel episode with Prue included.. I’m in

  21. Ao this is really in no way related to Charmed, but the only way to get iy made & get press is to try & connect it to Charmed. Anyways i would assume in the Charmed universe the only other power of three there could be would be evil to keep the balance of good & evil.

  22. Maria says:

    Jane the Virgin is lovely and well-written, it kinda gives some hope.

    Though it’s a shame they aren’t planning any connections to the original show, it’s one of the quite few cases where a sequel, not a reboot, would work very well. Fans have been longing for such a continuation ever since the show ended, a story about the sisters’ descendants (the new Charmed ones could be cousins or simply one of the sisters’ grandchildren) with family references, or even original cast cameos etc would surely please old fans while new stories in the same existing and already built universe would attract new ones.

    Now creators seem to be betting on independency instead of connection, and most people seem to be very sceptic about it. So it really is a big responsibility for the creators, they’re gonna have to do real good to keep that many people satisfied, as too many people for now know the original Charmed to start completely anew.
    They could probably ease off some of this stress by continuing the story, not retelling it. I guess it just will seem a bit wrong for some people, even if everything else is perfect – because if everything else can be done perfectly, why use the Charmed at all if you can make a brand new good witch show?

    And it would be a huge shame if the show lives a season or two and dies like Witches of East End. Or still lives being kinda nice but also very average and not even potentially big because of certain factors, like Shadowhunters.
    Because the idea is good and could really work.

    And yes, not sure setting it in 70s is a good idea, because why would you do that? A retro recreation can be a thing, but in this case such a thing is simply not enough. And modern TV really lacks good modern witch shows and could do with some – people just like that sort of thing, why not make it current?

  23. Temperance says:

    So, it’s not a reboot, but a reimagining. I wish these people could master some basic terms in their own industry.

  24. shaz says:

    Mike, I’m starting to wonder if you actually are smarter than a fifth grader… How did you figure there are 4 decades between the two series? Charmed ran 1998-2006; the reboot is set 1976. That’s 2-3 decades.

  25. Soraya E. says:

    I would be able to accept it as a reboot if they would at least make the 3 women related to each other. Not sisters persé, but cousins. Just like in the past in Charmed. (Baxter and such.)

    Also, I am of the opinion that they shouldn’t call it Charmed if it has nothing to do with the original show. By making it about the past or having it play in the past, it gives them ample possibilities to tie in things that happened on Charmed. Only then would I accept it being called Charmed.

    If they really want to keep it stand alone, but want to keep the PO3 element, call the show just that, Power of Three.

    Also, I would love it if you (TV Line) actually ask Q’s about this, not ask the CW boss, but the actual show bosses. (I love Jane the Virgin) I would love to know how they envision all of this… Also, I think I would be able to accept this more easily in any shape or form if Constance M Burge and/or Brad Kern would be involved in this. Since I doubt this will happen, I hope they drop the Charmed name or just do the darn tie ins with the original show.

  26. missy says:

    Ok, so they aren’t calling it ‘Charmed’ anymore, right? If it’s a “standalone” series, how can they?

    Glad they’ve made it clear though. I might be able to respect the show more, if it is it’s own thing :D

  27. Luke Man says:

    Soooo, it’s less a reboot then and more a ‘mooching from a success’ @_@ yeah well done, that will get the fans in *facepalm.

  28. Joanna says:

    This is unbelievable, I mean I love charmed but a reboot with new sisters, new storyline new everything. Why can’t you for once leave a TV show alone with no reboots or anything, at least add the sisters, Piper Phoebe Paige Prue Leo or even cole in it. This reboot is unbelievable.

  29. mary wheeler says:

    i dont know about this, us charmed fans have been wishing for new shows but with the original cast, this wasnt what we asked for, i loved the original series i loved the family feel of the show, i will watch 1 show if i dont feel it im not watching anymore

  30. B says:

    Combs and Milano were not throwing shade, don’t misreport.

  31. Rob says:

    If it’s “a self-contained, self-sustained show” …CALL IT SOMETHING ELSE!

  32. Quetta says:

    How can they even call it Charmed if the characters will have no relation to the Halliwell sisters? I’m kind of confused to the whole plot! Why don’t they show why Grams binded their powers, when or after Patty died, or her relationship w/ her whitelighter. or show Wyatt and Chris in the future? What led to the outcome in full detail as to why Chris came back from the future and what happens to the sisters, and Leo??1??? Hownd when he became a WL

    They can flashback and forward through the Halliwell line of blood. I mean there is so much that they can do, they can also incorporate Paige running magic school; show the boys as they grow into their power. Also, why and when the Manor became a museum. I mean, there’s so much they can do, but three freaking girls that has nothing, I mean absolutely nothing to do with the Charmed one? Rose M, is most definitely right; it is IRREPLACEABLE!!!!!!!!!!!

    I MIGHT BE TAKING THIS A LITTLE FAR, BUT WE AS FAN SHOULD BOYCOTT THE NETWORK WHEN THE SHOW AIRS IF THEY HAVEN’T MET ANY CONNECTIONS AS STATED ABOVE! I MOST CERTAINLY WILL!

  33. Andrea Dunn says:

    We love the original three girls with Page staring as well please don’t replace them

  34. Louise B says:

    Why not pick up the charmed series where it was left off? Wyatt and Chris grown as well as the other children spoken of at the end of the series could be an interesting coven

  35. Samantha says:

    This wouldn’t make any sense, just saying, but 1976? Phoebe would be 3 years old and Patty would be dead, so how would they carry on with tiny little witches that don’t even know how much power they hold. Yet, I love this show and I think this should take place with the sisters being around 12,13,14,15 somewhere around there. If you change your mind about the 1976, I’d love to play Phoebe Halliwell as a 12/13 year old. My best friend would also love to be Piper as a 13/14 year old. We just want charmed to have a long lived life and we think we can help make that happen. Please give us a chance and take my idea into consideration please.

  36. Brittany Nemitz says:

    How dare they!!! If it doesn’t have the original cast no one is going to watch it..it will be just like the rest of the failed remakes. CBS should listen to what ever fan is screaming… ORIGINAL CAST IS A MUST!!!! There is so much that can be done, have all 8 of their kids growing up and development of their powers.

  37. Bethany Staples says:

    I would like to see the origional stars as well as there children, to see the charmed ones help there kids become powerful witches…charmed! Otherwise i probably would find it boring and prefer not to watch, Shannon, Holly, Alyssa, and Rose made Charmed, well Charmed, wirhout them its pointless to reboot the show!

  38. Bethany says:

    If your going to bring Charmed back, do it the right way with the Halliwell sisters, continue it where it left off, lets see Holly (Piper), Alyssa (Pheobe), and Rose (Paige) teach there kids the powers of being Charmed! Without the origional stars this show will be ridiculous, need the three of them preferrably all 4 of the sisters which would be hard as shannons character (Prue)was killed but you could bring her back as a ghost like they do with Penny and Patty, but there has to be a Prue, Piper, Pheobe and Paige to be “Charmed” otherwise, change the name or its false advertisement.

  39. Melissa says:

    Once true charmed fans find out the Halliwell sisters won’t be in the cast it won’t fly. They WILL lose all charmed fans and won’t be as popular or last as long. I give it a year. We want the original sisters! All of them! It is so misleading ! ME and my daughter were SO excited until we found out the sisters all 4 weren’t going to be in it! We will NOT be watching. Sooo disappointed.

  40. Tracy says:

    No offense without the original cast I think the show will flop just like the remake of 90210 did.

  41. Anno Anno says:

    Unless the Original actors return it will fail ,the fans want the series to continue present day with the same characters AND ACTORS not some 1970s prequel