· 98 comments · Save ·
For Sale Apr 23, 2026 at 4:24 PM

'Clueless' Sequel Series No Longer in Development at Peacock

Posted by Anchor_Aways


‘Clueless’ Sequel Series With Alicia Silverstone No Longer in Development at Peacock (EXCLUSIVE)
Variety
‘Clueless’ Sequel Series With Alicia Silverstone No Longer in Development at Peacock (EXCLUSIVE)
The "Clueless" sequel series, which would see Alicia Silverstone reprise the role of Cher Horowitz, is not moving forward at Peacock

🚩 Report this post

98 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
AMA_requester 2 days ago +212
For the best really, people have nostalgia and appreciate Clueless but I don't really think that translates to wanting to see what this now in her late 40s early 50s year old character is doing now.
212
QuasiJudicialBoofer 2 days ago +118
Here's the pitch : Clueless; but no 90s, no high school, no hopeful idealism. But it will be called Clueless and we expect a hefty cashgrab
118
lavahot 2 days ago +20
It will be called "Clued" and will be about how they've started an uprising against the wealthy.
20
MtFuzzmore 2 days ago +15
There’s already things like Vanderpump or RHW to see how this would turn out.
15
thePinguOverlord 2 days ago +9
I mean it’s Emma. It is one of those literary classic contemporary adaptations. 10 Things I Hate About You is my favourite of it though.
9
monty_kurns 2 days ago +8
Clueless, 10 Things I Hate About You, O, and Baz Luhrmann’s Romeo + Juliet…the mid-90s to very early 2000s had some banger modern adaptations of classics!
8
xOHSOx 2 days ago
Yeah exactly no thanks. I rather they make something new that’s maybe inspired by it and other movies but let’s get back to making original movies not remakes or unoriginal sequels.
0
HotBrownFun 1 day ago +1
she's still clueless, she was eating random berries from the street not too long ago. Her chat was freaking out thinking she'd killed herself since she was incommunicado for a day.
1
ImLaunchpadMcQuack 2 days ago +287
Good.
287
realblush 2 days ago +27
2 different versions of the musical even flopped, that IP is dead
27
nowhereman136 2 days ago +15
No to a sequel series Maybe to a reboot that does what Clueless did but with a different Jane Austen novel
15
lefrench75 2 days ago +10
“Emma” was particularly well suited to the high school setting because Emma was a total queen bee, but other Austen stories in a modern setting would be fun too. “Fire Island” à la “Pride and Prejudice with gay men” is a great example and perfectly applies Austen’s humour and mode of social commentary to a different demographic and setting.
10
VampireHunterAlex 2 days ago +84
Has any of these ‘years later’ reboot series worked? And i dont mean just lasted a handful of seasons, i mean moreso that if you’re a fan of the OG, then you MUST WATCH the revival.
84
landalezjr 2 days ago +160
The new Scrubs reboot is actually quite good. However this is not the norm and most of these have not worked well.
160
steve-d 2 days ago +52
It helps Bill Lawrence is involved.
52
TrapperJean 2 days ago +23
Him and Mike Schur are so f****** good and the best creators/directors going right now Scrubs, The Office, P&R, The Good Place, Man on the Inside, Ted Lasso, Rooster, Spin City, Cougar Town, insane catalog between them *how the hell did i forget Shrinking?
23
nearcatch 2 days ago +5
Left Shrinking and Bad Monkey off that list for Lawrence. Ted Lasso really snowballed into a second career stage for him.
5
TrapperJean 2 days ago +3
Omg I cant believe I left Shrinking out, I f****** love Shrinking
3
raysofdavies 2 days ago +17
He is so good. You can see how Ted Lasso ent so downhill after he left.
17
steve-d 2 days ago +5
For real - he's got the Midas Touch.
5
Burrito-mancer 2 days ago +4
Shrinking is the one of the best comedies to come out this decade
4
softrockstarr 2 days ago +2
He wasn't really involved, though.
2
Suchgallbladder 2 days ago +14
It’s not a reboot. It’s a continuation.
14
LiteHedded 1 day ago +1
clueless wasn't going to be either...
1
palinsafterbirth 2 days ago -11
Don't forget this is the 2nd attempt at a Scrubs reboot
-11
CrusaderLyonar 2 days ago +54
The first "reboot" wasn't actually a reboot it was a spinoff that aired the following year after season 8.
54
Mrchristopherrr 2 days ago +17
Learning some of the backstory for it kind of gave me some newfound respect for Bill Lawrence. Essentially he was muscled into making a spin off, then to hamfist it into being season 9. It was the height of the recession though so he opted to take the hit so the whole crew could keep their jobs
17
Kevbot1000 2 days ago +66
King of the Hill and Scrubs are the two most recent examples of revivals done right.
66
ositola 2 days ago +14
Xmen 97
14
mike_pants 2 days ago +1
That one isn't a "years later" show, though. It's continuing the plot of the original series.
1
Mattyzooks 2 days ago +35
Twin Peaks.
35
LADYBIRD_HILL 2 days ago +7
Close the thread
7
RandomPersonBob 2 days ago +57
Malcom in the Middle was really good, probably because it was short and just the right amount. I forgot how much I loved that show and all the actors just nailed it, especially Reese.
57
shifty1032231 2 days ago +7
I thought it was okay. There are some things that I didn't like but I overall enjoyed it.
7
lrodhubbard 2 days ago +38
Malcolm in the Middle, Scrubs, The Conners... Futurama... Even Peacock's own Saved By The Bell reboot. Yes it can work with the right team.
38
thatisnotmyknob 2 days ago +30
King of the Hill
30
_kvl_ 2 days ago +10
Kings of the Hill surprised me with just how good it was. One of the best revivals in recent years.
10
Kevbot1000 2 days ago +17
Worst thing about the Saved by the Bell reboot was the theme song. Literally everything else worked for me.
17
BenderBenRodriguez 2 days ago +2
Futurama I would agree with in terms of the first revival on Comedy Central but the Hulu run has been a little rough unfortunately.
2
EchoesofIllyria 2 days ago +2
It’s funny. People said exactly the same about the CC revival when it came out. Now it’s treated in the same breath, or similarly, to the original Fox run compared to the Hulu run. I can only assume that when the Hulu revival is cancelled and it comes back again elsewhere, the Hulu run will also be lumped in with the other two when people say the newest version is rough lol
2
BenderBenRodriguez 2 days ago +1
I mean, for what it's worth I was there and I remember arguing with people about it lol. FWIW I do think the Fox run (more so specifically the third and fourth production seasons) are better than the Comedy Central run, but I thought people were too hard on those and would debate people about them. I also don't know that their reputation has totally come around...I mean, they were never THAT badly received but I still hear complaints about the "EyePhone" episode and such to this day. I think there's at least some persistent feeling that they weren't as good as the initial run. But I personally really enjoyed them and thought they were mostly pretty consistently funny and worth watching. I tried to be optimistic with the Hulu run, but in this case it really does feel like it came back a little "wrong" and despite a few good episodes I'd be hard pressed to name anything that I really think is among the best they've done (the CC run didn't hit it out of the park as often as Fox, but there were episodes like The Late Phillip J. Fry which absolutely did hit those highs), and a number of episodes are just genuinely weak and sometimes a little baffling to me that anyone thought they would be funny. Like they just finally hit that point where the people involved got a little too old and lost their edge for it or something. I do get what you're saying, but it's a thing people often say about The Simpsons and which proves to be less and less true in that case, given the long tail of less well-received seasons that has eventually caught up to them. Like, it's true there were some people that thought seasons 4 and 5 of The Simpsons represented a significant downturn and now those seasons are pretty universally considered classics, but as you go along in those seasons you do eventually hit a wall where no matter how old those seasons get they haven't been retroactively claimed to that extent (i.e. season 20 is now something like 16/17 years ago and while I'm sure there are people who grew up with it and love it, on the whole you'd be hard pressed to find a lot of people who think it's as good as season 4). We'll see, but I feel like Futurama has maybe just finally hit that point.
1
EchoesofIllyria 2 days ago +1
Tbf I was mostly being flippant with my “prediction” lol I agree people were overly harsh on the CC seasons (I was there too, it made interesting reading lol). But then I also think people are being overly harsh on the Hulu seasons. Maybe I’m just easily pleased, but I feel like there’s been enough to enjoy to be glad it exists and if my memory was wiped I’m not sure I’d notice a difference between its middling episodes and at least the CC middling episodes. The Simpsons is a little different because it’s never gone away for people to miss it, but there have definitely been periods that people have cited as improvements, though not to the level of the classic seasons. I wouldn’t know tbh, I haven’t watched anything from like the last 20 years outside of the movie. I suspect a lot of CC’s image rehab in recent years came from having a pitch-perfect finale. Sticking the landing can do a lot to improve a reputation, I reckon.
1
jake3988 2 days ago +4
> Malcolm in the Middle, Scrubs, The Conners... Futurama... Even Peacock's own Saved By The Bell reboot. Yes it can work with the right team. To be fair the 'revival' for The Conners was the roseanne season and that sucked hard. After they kicked out Roseanne and toned down the over the top politics and it settled in, turned into a really freaking great show. I also really enjoyed the one-year revival of Mad About You. I also enjoyed the Will and Grace revival. I've also been finishing up the 3rd season of the Anamaniacs that they revived. Also great.
4
[deleted] 2 days ago -3
[deleted]
-3
explosivo85 2 days ago +5
Viewership and quality are two different things.
5
paulerxx 2 days ago +5
Scrubs + Malcom In The Middle both worked, just in the last few months Futurama and King Of The Hill both fit the bill as well.
5
whichwitch9 2 days ago +6
Not all are series, but for soft reboots in general the first Jumanji sequel movie, Scrubs, Malcom in the Middle, the Psych movies... there's a handful. But people are happy about them so you don't have the discourse keeping them around the same way bad ones do.
6
BenderBenRodriguez 2 days ago +2
Star Trek: The Next Generation (and a couple of the others like DS9 and Voyager). I think that's pretty much it to be honest. Reputedly Twin Peaks too I guess but I still need to finish that.
2
othersbeforeus 2 days ago +2
Degrassi: The Next Generation was very successful, I watched it as a kid with no knowledge of the original. But that was some time ago.
2
Premislaus 2 days ago +2
I mean... a fair amount? There was a time when they were almost universally terrible (like video games adaptations), but (like video games adaptations) they drastically improved the last couple of years. At least people here seems to have liked Scrubs, King of the Hill, Malcolm in the Middle.
2
SwagginsYolo420 2 days ago +2
The Twin Peaks revival arguably was the greatest season of television ever made, surpassing the original aired seasons.
2
TheCooze 2 days ago +7
Cobra Kai and Ash vs Evil Dead. Only two that worked imo. The new scrubs is not funny and barely anyone came back for it. New Malcom in the Middie has everybody come back but still not really funny.
7
EchoesofIllyria 2 days ago +5
Funny is subjective but “barely anyone came back for it” is objectively wrong whether you’re referring to the cast or viewers.
5
TheCooze 2 days ago -2
Yes not funny is my opinion. Never stated as a fact. I shouldn’t have to add imo to everything I say, use context clues. Turk, JD, and Elliot are the only main returning characters. Carla isn’t even in most of the episodes. Dr Cox is barely there. Janitor only shows up at the end. The Todd and Hooch are barely around for a couple jokes. So how am I wrong?
-2
EchoesofIllyria 2 days ago +3
Sorry, when I said funny is subjective I meant I wasn’t arguing that part and was gonna focus on the other part. My fault, probably wasn’t clear. Turk, JD and Elliot are 3/4 of the main cast and Carla was only in it so little because of other commitments (same with Cox). They’ve already said both will be back a lot more if the show gets renewed. The Janitor not being there makes perfect sense given how he exited the original run (not to mention his age). Jordan, Todd and Hooch showed up about as much as they did in the original show. Kelso’s long retired, Ted’s actor died. Regardless, “barely anyone came back” is a gross exaggeration and incorrect.
3
TheCooze 2 days ago -1
Ok so maybe I didn’t choose the best wording. But I stand by the sentiment. Though tbh I haven’t watched the original show in many years. But I would disagree that Jordan, Todd and Hooch are getting the same amount of screen time. Jordan isn’t even there till the end. Hooch got maybe 3(?) jokes in the season. Same with Todd. And whatever reasons are behind others barely being there or not at all doesn’t change the fact that they aren’t. And I guess when I said “main returning characters” I should specify I mean “known characters” who are in most episodes. And all this is made more clear to me after watching the new Malcom episodes which had so many characters come back that there just wasn’t enough time for them all.
-1
EchoesofIllyria 2 days ago +4
Tbf Jordan would frequently disappear for episodes at a time especially in the first half of the show. She’s only in around half of them overall. 1/10’s on the low side but it wasn’t unusual for her to miss several episodes. Hooch is in *FIVE* episodes in the entire original run (and three of those in season 4). He just made one hell of an impression in those five episodes. The Todd’s the only one you could make a good case should be in more to emulate the original - he appears like 50% more times than Jordan.
4
TheCooze 2 days ago +1
Well fair enough on hooch and Jordan then. But having 3 of the original main 7 (again I can’t really count cox, carla, janitor as they are essentially guest roles) and having at least 9 new regulars on the show just doesn’t sit right with me. And to be clear, I get why Kelso and Ted didn’t return, but combined with the others the lack of presence is felt more.
1
EchoesofIllyria 2 days ago +2
Yeah that’s fair. I mean they always had a somewhat rotating supporting cast because of the nature of the interns, but I can see why it might be jarring to have so many at once, especially because of how *modern* these interns are compared to the returning characters. Anyway, I hope it gets renewed and we get more Cox and Carla (didn’t seem like Janitor was sticking around as a regular but who knows)!
2
FlukyS 2 days ago +1
I quite liked the Malcolm in the Middle miniseries
1
gmark109 2 days ago +1
Like any other show, they work when the right people are involved, and don’t work when made for the wrong reasons. There may be disproportionately more examples of the latter, but the “nobody asked for this” excuse is just as bunk here as it is usually.
1
Pugilist12 2 days ago +1
Twin Peaks. Party Down.
1
Phallic_Moron 2 days ago +1
Party Down worked when they did it.  This Clueless remake is a Ron Donald Don't.
1
PejicFilip 2 days ago +1
Does Cobra Kai count?
1
Luci-Noir 1 day ago +1
The new Dexter is excellent.
1
jyper 1 day ago +1
Most of the examples people are giving are continuations. One reboot that really worked was DuckTales 2019
1
Cardude86 2 days ago
Better Call Saul, The Originals, Futurama, Angel, the 50 NCIS shows, Bosch, Justice League Unlimited, The new Batman series, and I'm sure many more. Although the majority do seem to suck and only last a season.
0
JulianVanderbilt 2 days ago +3
Better Call Saul in no way fits their category. 
3
violue 2 days ago +2
I think you're mixing spin-offs with reboots...
2
Mattyzooks 2 days ago +1
Angel and JLU weren't years later reboots though. They were spinoffs/shows in a TV universes, coming out soon after or during the previous show in the universe. JLU came out right after JL ended which came out soon after Superman/Batman Beyond and aired during Static Shock's run.
1
Purple_Compote_386 2 days ago
Have you been living under a rock?
0
DrMostlyMittens 2 days ago +16
AS IF!
16
davidbernhardt 2 days ago +11
Paul Rudd will still look the same age as the he did in the original even if they wait 10 more years to launch it
11
CrissBliss 2 days ago +5
I wanted to watch just so I could see Alicia and Paul together again.
5
Mountain_Wafer_9340 2 days ago +4
Elevator pitch - so we go again right, but everyone is old and rough and the world is in flames and then about 15 minutes in we dump all the oldies and a load of their kids and such turn out ot be the focus and its about social media and ADHD and it's got this amazing AI written song about something and at the end there is a big BBQ and the kids and the adults all dance together and do wacky faces.
4
bguzewicz 2 days ago +5
That is probably for the best.
5
Jarita12 2 days ago +3
I didn´t even know they were making one. Not everything needs sequel or remake
3
Ok_Tell3168 2 days ago +3
Thank god. As if.
3
honey_rainbow 2 days ago +3
No one even asked for this. So thank goodness.
3
Ikarus3426 2 days ago +2
Smart choice. Nothing about how they were going about this made sense.
2
WoodpeckerGingivitis 2 days ago +2
On Peacock even 🥴
2
violue 2 days ago +2
Sounds good!
2
TanAllOvaJanAllOva 2 days ago +2
It’s a sequel to the movie or the show? Either way, picking up nearly 30 yrs later is a choice
2
Jackielegs43 1 day ago +2
Good.
2
mike10dude 2 days ago +1
The ABC and upn series was decent enough
1
blond_nirvana 2 days ago +2
I was wondering if anyone else remembered the TV show. More than a few actors returned to do the series. Silverstone couldn't because she had a development deal and couldn't reprise her role.
2
Turbulent_Tale6497 2 days ago +1
They must have watched The Requin
1
aunty-kelly 2 days ago +1
They couldn’t find a Jane Austen story that would fit. There’s no sequel to “Emma” right?
1
Strict_Berry7446 2 days ago +1
Shocking!
1
BenTramer 2 days ago +1
Good. Just watch the movie if you’re in the mood for Clueless.
1
Accomplished-Head449 2 days ago +1
There's a fantastic new 4K transfer of the movie. That's good enough
1
HankSteakfist 1 day ago +1
I totally forgot that they already made a Clueless TV series in the 90s.
1
SmooshedLion 1 day ago +1
Rachel Blanchard IS the better Cher
1
Scottify 1 day ago +1
Good, now cancel the legal blonde prequel next
1
bigdog701 19 hr ago +1
Weird.. People are tired of recycled garbage. Didnt see it coming
1
wildcatofthehills 2 days ago +1
Yes, good. No more shitty tv remakes masquerading as sequels to great films. It literally only worked with Fargo because they just followed the idea of crime in the Midwest. We didnt need a Tewlve Monkeys nor a Snowpiercer tv shows. Let this trend die
1
astroglitch0 2 days ago +1
Sometimes(almost always) it is just best to leave things alone.
1
sarbeans9001 2 days ago -1
the only revival i can think of that actually worked was... honestly i'm drawing a blank lol. they all feel like cash grabs and clueless specifically feels like something that only works as a 90s time capsule
-1
← Back to Board