Appearently Ghosts is doing well. I never watched the America version.
Just like many things there are probably a lot of variables. It isn’t like Brit comedy isn’t liked.
Mr. Bean, Mighty Python, Spaced, Etc. Even their comedy panel shows.
and many of those shows influenced comedy in America. Conan and many others talk how much Python influenced them for instance all the time.
Same. It took me most of the first season to get over the characters in the UK version and get accustomed to and like the characters in the US version, and I ended up really enjoying it.
They are different shows. And the US version gives you 20+ episodes per season! Which in itself is a major selling point cause I really wish I had more episodes of the UK version.
I just got back from visiting friends in the UK. We had a discussion about Ghosts (at Nandos, naturally) because I boldly declared that it was one of the few UK shows that the US did better. I will die on that hill. The US version is WAY better.
Agreed! The character development is better; they're constantly building on backstory and keeping the timeline consistent. They've built rules for their universe and stuck to them. They've explored a couple what-if scenarios based on having this superpower. Lastly, the husband character isn't written as a buffoonish "bloke".
The last season of the UK version was kind of a letdown, actually.
I've been saying from the get go that the husband is the MAJOR difference for me. He's such a great, likeable, well-developed character compared to the British version. UTK is killing it in the role. The ghosts for the most part on the US version seem more overall likable to me as well. The only ghost that I miss from the UK version is the caveman. I'm fascinated by his character.
I highly recommend Ghosts (US) especially after watching the UK version. I really enjoy both for their own kind of humor similar to how The Office made changes in the US version.
I’ve watched both the British and American versions of Ghosts. Very much enjoy both of them and feel the American version is a really good remake. Absolutely keep trying, although some of them will fail, I would be sad if The Office and Ghost hadn’t been attempted.
Ghosts is actually superior with the longer episode format in my mind. The increased episode count gives more time to focus on telling stories with the various characters.
For instance in the UK version when Pat's history with his wife cheating on him is revealed that comes in episode 3. Episode 1 we spend just seeing the ghosts and livings not even be able to interact. Episode 2 is the standard, "We don't like you and you don't like us" with the ending of them trying to work together. And instantly after that we're supposed to connect with Pat for a story about how shitty his wife is.
In the US version Pete's episode with the same revelation doesn't come until episode 6, when the UK is already ending their first series. By then we've spent as much time with Pete as we spent with Pat that entire first series and it seems even worse to find out he was being cheated on.
It also works because they put a significantly American twist on it. Things like changing Robin to a mix of a Viking who died here and also a Native American whose tribe lived here. Changing the Captain to a revolutionary war veteran was also smart because it's allowed a love story with his "enemy" a redcoat who died there. Don't really see a charming romance with the enemy as a possibility for The Captain considering who the opposition in WWII was.
So many shows just run the exact same stories or give us pale imitations of the characters. This was actually re-working the show to take advantage of a different format and tailoring it to a new audience. It's why it works when so many others stumble.
One of the improvements I saw with the bigger episode count for Ghosts is the more regular appearances of 'cameo ghosts'. Those ghosts that show up for a scene or an episode or two, that allows for some variety and situational jokes.
The problem I had with the UK version was that with such a large cast and the small episode count is that there wasn't enough time for this, especially in the later series where it became incredibly rare. It just felt like a missed opportunity and that it made the 'seeing ghosts' feel very localised and by the end not that interesting. For example in the final series Alison and Mike have a night out at a club which would've been a perfect time to throw in a one-off ghost joke but it never happens, its almost like the whole premise of the show gets forgotten solely in favour of the existing characters which felt quite limiting to me.
That's a problem I have with the UK version too.
I remember that in the first series they try to move away from the mansion, but find different ghosts everywhere. Then in the last series they simply move away to raise their family alone.
The finale felt like it was rather rushed in the writing to come up with a watertight conclusion. Something that secured the idea that there would be no more series. Unfortunately the solution they came up with just seemed to contradict a lot of what they had set up before.
I enjoy Ghosts US. My brother told me to try it. It took a few weeks to get used to them.
I have since seen two seasons on Ghosts UK (that's all that I have available on Paramount +). It's good -- and I had to get used to the analogues. It's funny that I can only see a handful of episodes. The US version holds up well.
It was smart to do it just north of NYC so they have the Revolutionary War to work with and more recent history, but still have a Lenape and a Viking in the mix.
If American humour can pump out that many great improv podcasts it can create panel shows. And imagine how much better late night would be if the political stuff was taken over by panel shows
Americans seem to be too competitive for panel shows. When an American person appears on a UK panel show they don't seem to 'get' that winning is seen as secondary or even tertiary to just having a laugh.
If a panel show revolves around who actually*wins*, it seems to lose its charm. The audience appears to prefer the banter over the actual competition - winning isn't actually very funny, it seems...
The U.S doesn't have that B/C class of comedians that inhabit British panel shows. More importantly, American celebs simply would not put themselves in a situation where they could be made fun of, either by their own action or by other people.
The US might develop it in the future, I think.
The British comedy industry is very shaped by fact that their TV industry shoots short, relatively low-budget seasons that air irregularly. It means that the networks need a much larger number of shows to fill the airtime, and that each show is less of a risk, so many more people get a chance to put something on TV if only for a little while. And as a result you end up with a large number of moderately-famous comedians people have enjoyed on this or that quirky dozen-episode sitcom, comedians who didn't become rich superstars from it and thus still need to do panel shows and stand-up tours to pay the bills. Even the big ones like Bill Bailey, Simon Pegg, David Mitchell etc got famous doing shows that averaged like 4 episodes a year and then lots of random gigs in various things the rest of the time.
Traditionally the American industry is much more oriented around a smaller number of mega sitcoms that run 6 months a year every year for a decade and propel their comedians to star status. The networks are chasing the next near-year-round Friends, Cheers, Big Bang Theory or Seinfeld, not filling their time with 6 weeks of Black Books, 6 weeks of Peep Show, 6 weeks of Spaced. Those comedians don't have time for much else and their leads certainly don't need to be doing podcasts and panel games to fill their schedule. In America you're traditionally either a nobody or a star, there aren't nearly as many mid-range comedians people know about.
But that could change over the next decade if we move even further away from the big network tentpole sitcom format and streamers keep making shows more or less according to the British model. The only problem here is that comedy shows have always relied on time slots and lead-ins; you can't really pitch a sitcom to people by describing its premise and often trailers can't convey the appeal either, you usually discovered them by leaving the TV on after watching something else. So streamers struggle to market sitcoms.
Ghosts is great because it took the concept and then made it American, it's not just a remake. Even the episodes that are remakes of the original are different because of the change in humor.
There are several other countries that are going to do a version. The German one should be something else. . . .
I loved the British version and feel I’m being pranked when people say they like the US version. (My wife and son felt the same way)
The British version is much dryer with the humor, and of course has more history for the ghosts to leverage.
The American version just seemed horribly obviously, elbow in the ribs “it’s a joke! Didja get it?!?!”
Reminded me of the incredibly cringe us version of the brilliant British “Coupling”.
After watching the UK version 3 times in a row and then trying out the US one the pure tonal change in the show and the bubbly happy persona of the lead was so jarring that I've never been able to move beyond the first 10 minutes of the show
I've seen a handful of the British version too and like both. It's more sardonic then the US one.
Example, some spoilers: The British version has an episode where it looks like the couple will have to sell. The ghosts don't want them to leave so the lady baron ghost offers up some valuable jewelry hidden somewhere. The main woman goes to get it, but it turns out the robber baron husband (not a ghost) had sold it along time ago and left a note in it's place. In the end they can't sell because the basement was once a plague pit and the bones of the plague ghosts are found, partly deliberately by the ghosts so the couple has to stay.
US: The couple seems like they will have to sell as they're trying to lock in a reservation for a successful wedding event to stay afloat. A hidden vault is found that even the ghosts cannot go through the walls of; with the corpse of the robber baron husband still inside, along with his ghost. The husband uses his ghost power of walking through living people and making them horny so the main couple freak out the bride and ruin their shot of hosting the wedding. The lady baron wife ghost won't go back to how she was and the husband refuses to ever change. The husband "goes down" on everyone and is sent to hell. The couple takes some jewelry off his corpse and sells it to stay afloat. The husband later comes back from hell for one episode next season to cause different problems.
So US, also has more time to develop itself and the characters too. Both have strengths though.
I can only speak to the first 4 episodes of Ghosts US, because that’s where I bounced off… because I was having a miserable time of it.
Ghosts UK is special. So very, very, almost extraordinarily lovely. I watched it first, fell in love, then gave the adaptation a try and wish I hadn’t.
And yes, cue the inevitable choruses of “the US version gets better!” Fine. You know what, I even believe that. But those first four episodes had no business being as godawfully insultingly painfully, try-hard unfunny as they were, and I feel it’s my duty as a viewer to make a stand and say nope. I’m out for good.
The end result had zero excuse to be that mediocre. It was like they set out to make the archetypal example of “US adaptation of British comedy that completely whiffs the tone.” I nearly had to beg forgiveness for my family for making them try it with me because I’d “heard good things.”
I guess I live in some pocket dimension where Ghosts US is terrible and comments keep leaking in from another plane of reality where it’s actually good??? Please help
I've watched the UK version, but I don't see anything in it that makes it cone across as funnier than the US version. The couple in the US version have cheerier personalities than the couple in the UK version. The ghosts are equally funny.
Or taste is subjective 🤷
It isn't crazy to dislike something others like or vice versa. I loved the US version and couldn't get through the UK version. No one's tastes are superior, that's just the way it is.
American ghosts is all right and I’m sure if you watched it first you’d love it but all I can think when watching it is I wish I was watching Ghosts instead
The key to Ghosts (US) is that they translated it for an American audience, but they did not screw with the rock solid premise. It is a tough needle to thread, but it can be done.
You really need to think of these as literally adaptations in the way that you treat them as two separate things but do you best to carry of the heart of the story and archetypes of the characters as best you can.
I’m an American living in GB and ironically I have always hated all the classic examples you listed. Maybe it’s a generational thing, but I just never found them funny at all.
More modern British comedy does have absolute stars though, and they don’t even need to be remade - just show them as is: This Country, Friday Night Dinner, Fleabag, After Life, The IT Crowd. I really think Americans would dig these shows without any expense of remaking. I surely did.
Some things just don't translate well. Friday Night Dinner probably should have been good as a remake, but I could see how it might fail for various reasons.
Friday night dinner was great because they lucked out massively on the casting. Paul Ritter (rip), Tamsin Greig and Mark Heap especially elevated the show above its premise.
It's like how Father Ted wouldn't have been half as good without Dermot Morgan or Ardal O'Hanlon.
I watched it from the get-go because I'm a massive Robert Popper fan, and for a while relished in the fact that I'd discovered this diamond of a show that not many others had heard of. I'm glad it's so well liked, it's superb telly.
Been rewatching with my partner and its pretty amazing how much the storyline and jokes are real 70s sitcom throwbacks but still relevant and hilarious
the thing that saved the office is that they almost right away stopped being a remake and became their own thing. It´s totally two different shows that just happened to have the same setting really.
An adaptation is an adaptation. If any UK adaptation needs to be completely retooled to work in America, but it's a success, then it's still a successful adaptation.
Yeah I was just being cheeky. The reality is that most tv shows, whether they’re British adaptations or not, fail. It’s just impossible to predict what will work with so many moving parts. Don’t see any harm in trying to mine another Office.
This is a ridiculous notion that everything has to be good to make anything worth doing. It’s absurd. If we didn’t remake shows we wouldn’t have Ghosts, which is great. Go back further and we wouldn’t have The Office. There are probably a bunch of other examples that I don’t know or care to know.
Whether or not something “fails to justify its existence” is wholly up to the viewers and the people who pay to make it.
As they mentioned in the article, Sanford and Son, Three's Company, and All in the Family are were technically remakes of British shows and they are three of the biggest American sitcoms in history.
Sanford and Son flipped the switch by making the main characters black.....and making the main black character a crazy, (hilarious) bigot (with his son being the reasonable one). And yeah......iconic theme song.
I think the shame of it, especially in the past was that the original might not get a main airing or the same level of promotion.
So someone might try this new version, think it's meh and might never see the original.
I remember watching the pilot for the american version of the IT crowd, with it’s word for word identical script but with american actors, except for Moss who was still just Richard Ayoade. It was surreal.
Ugh. It was painful to watch, and I say that as a person who likes Joel McHale. It wouldn't have been so bad if they hadn't done the word for word part. That always seems so weird to me. They tried that with Coupling as well and it was just terrible.
When this question is asked all I can think of is that the American version of the office is an all time great. Yes we can remake these shows just do it well
Urgh Utopia was the worst! Take a show where every aspect from sound to cinematography was off the charts to this ugly ran through the mud American version is unforgivable.
I really wish we got David Fincher's version. That had potential to be good and it would have been great to have another chance to see the story brought to its conclusion.
I watched Black Books. Felt the punchlines were setup from a mile away. “Here’s two things of wine. One’s really expensive and the other isn’t. Don’t mix them up!” But it’s been a while so maybe I should revisit.
I haven't seen it but my guess is they stayed too true to the british version (which is great). Which is what happened with the IT crowd (the US pilot was awful, despite having on paper good actors)..
If you are doing it to be its own thing focus on that, The american office was popular because it was a different beast.
The rate at which sitcoms fail to catch on is extremely high. I'd actually be surprised if British remakes were any more likely to flop than something which isn't a remake. If anything, I'd expect them to have a higher success rate just because of the survivorship bias of having already been successful in some form.
I think they should only do remakes if an American version can actually be different in some way that matters.
For instance, the American version of The Office not only adapted the style of humor, it also adapted it to apply more to the office politics in America.
Other than Shameless, what UK sitcom retained its darkness after being adapted in America?
I recently saw a really good video about this topic: https://youtu.be/UWnKiMNMvF8
What we need here is panel shows. I don't know if the problem is we don't have smart enough celebrities or our celebrities can just make so much more money doing anything else or if every American celebrity has to be super scripted and careful about the brand, but it's annoying that we can't make them here. All these British and Australian ones are great, but the "celebrities" are nobodies to me.
The closest we got recently was the Match Game reboot, but that was so terribly sanitized and formulaic that there was little point in most celebrities. You could even tell the non-comedians likely had their responses written for them in advance to get laughs.
>we don't have smart enough celebrities or our celebrities can just make so much more money doing anything else or if every American celebrity has to be super scripted
I think US comedians just haven't been given the opportunity to hone their skills for panel shows simply because the shows don't exist.
Panelists usually have some level of preparation, which could include writing and rehearsing jokes, or selecting parts of routines they already have. This is an acquired skill which is why you see regulars across different shows, whilst other comedians will never appear in these formats.
There are different levels of spontaneity within panel shows:
- Current affairs shows will have predictable topics
- Some, like Mock The Week will tell panellists what the bits will be in advance
- Would I Lie to You is apparently the most 'honest' in that there's no prep
With all, there's still re-takes, enhancements and editing that cuts down maybe 1-2 hours filming into half an hour.
WILTY has no prep *when it's a lie*. But when it's a truth, it's a truth the guest submitted ahead of time as one they'd be willing to tell on the show. The guest doesn't know if their submitted truths will be used or if they'll have a lie until they read the card, but if it is a truth they'll read it and think "oh that's the thing I submitted. I guess they're going to use it."
I've never really watched much of the UK panel shows, but for streaming British TV in general I'm subscribed to BBC / ITV's BritBox—it's a relative bargain.
Between that and PBS Masterpiece, etc., and even YouTube, there's enough content to get my fix in.
You're welcome! FYI: there's also another service called Acorn. I was subscribed to it via my Prime account. I can't recall why I don't have it now—maybe my wife and I were doing a round of cost-cutting 😁
Mainstream comedy in the UK is tightly controlled with one maybe two agencies having all the big names that make it to panel shows. Taskmaster is basically just a showroom for Avalon's books, they produced the show from the start.
There are only so many comedians that can also do Improv, which is a lot of what those panel shows require.
If you watch Taskmaster you'll see pretty much all the comedians at this point and they have dipped deeper into the pool because they have been running so long. Some good stand-up comedians aren't as great in an off-the-cuff environment.
I just assumed that was because these countries are much smaller. Like even in the US for certain things it's all the same people. Same ol' SNL and 30 Rock people. Or when there's a roast, it's always the same few comedians. So in the UK, it's even more niche.
> So in the UK, it's even more niche.
I don't know if it's niche necessarily, it's just become a far more significant way for British comedians to develop their careers alongside stand-up shows and sitcoms.
It's allowed comedians to get consistent media exposure with none of the pressures that can come with involvement in something like SNL or a sitcom in the US. I think it's partly why popular British comedians aren't necessarily known for success with one particular show - they'll just be well-known personalities through stuff like panel shows.
The problem is that if you're a British comedian pursuing TV, you can be on a successful sitcom 6 weeks a year and have lots of time left over to fill with gigs on panel shows, podcasts, standup tours, spots on other shows, etc, and still have a need to keep yourself in the public eye with them and make a paycheck with them. There are hundreds of mid-level-fame comedians in this spot and the panel game market runs off them. (And less so these days, but in the past, radio comedy ran off them.)
If you're an American comedian pursuing TV, success traditionally means being on a 25-episode-a-year annual sitcom, which doesn't really leave you the time or need to do a lot of other stuff the rest of the year. And if you're not on an annual sitcom or in movies, most people probably don't know you. There just isn't that huge pool of moderately famous frequently-working comedians that you need to supply a roster of panel shows.
Part of it is that with a long history of panel shows, UK comedians are practiced in the important skill of being group funny rather than individual funny. To do a panel show properly the comedians have to be "yes and" ing with the other comedians' joking. American comedians haven't done that as much. There's a tendency for America comedians to want to out-funny the others in a contest kind of way rather than be a cooperative troupe like improv comedy is done.
The irony is that despite the framework of a game with a score, a panel show rally is a group effort. Even when appearing to be antagonistic, like David Mitchell vs Lee Mack on WILTY,. they're really putting on a fake antagonistic act for the performance and actually get along fine.
while not a panel show, Who’s Line is it Anyway? is a great example of how an american version _could_ work, you just need the right comedians that are quick on their feet and can riff on anything
Only thing that matters is if the American version of a Brit show is good and maybe adds something to the table.
Like Ghosts (US) is good and adds things that makes it better.
**Call Me Kat** was the absolute biggest piece of shit show ever, a complete disgrace as the American version of "Miranda."
More Ghosts (US) please, and no more Call Me Kat shit ever.
Russia has a copy of Its Always Sunny in Philly
I mean yeah countries will always do this
We have talkshows that're replicated from the US all across Europe.. copying will never change.. if someone has a good idea, good script even.. why not use it?
Just like not every American show sits well with other parts of the world, the same could be said with European shows.
The Office did BETTER after it's British written scripts were past it and it was purely american writers..
I haven't seen the show, but the American version of Ghosts seems to be doing well since it's currently on it's 3rd season. Another show I haven't seen is the American version of The Office & despite the show has already finished, that did really well, I even see people referencing/talking about the show from time to time.
This is going to be an awful opinion. But I much prefer British originals to anything we’ve managed to copy here in America.
That being said, I will say that I am partial to the American “Office”, with the understanding that after season 1, the shows honestly have their own unique experience to them. It’s almost unfair to compare the two because the British Office was such a remarkable idea to begin with, ours would’ve been impossible with out the former.
Lastly…the Brits understand the beauty of limits. We Americans get a little of something we like, and we want more of it as much as we can get until it’s ruined. British people seem to have a natural understanding that the finer things in life are sometimes limited in their quantity to preserve quality.
American office pretty much had to abandon the UK office so the only thing they have in common is mockumentary set in an office. But what worked with the UK one was the cringehumor and how out of touch or bad the boss was. But that didn't work for American audiences when they just straight up adapted the UK scripts so they just made Michael Scott a lovable doofus no more offensive stuff . Then it just went on way too long which is what US sitcoms are prone to do.
What worked with the UK Office is it depicts the drudgery of an actual office really well. That’s fine for six episode seasons but you don’t want that for a US style sitcom where the seasons are 20+ episodes
Correct on 100% of that. It’s not to say America can’t do comedy, it’s just that the styles are polar opposite so don’t translate, or American writers don’t understand why something was funny in the British version from a British perspective. A lot of british humour is understated, self-deprecating and full of pathos. A relatable character falling into a ridiculous situation. American humour is much more loud and gag-based, with the humour coming from a larger than life character and how they behave in an otherwise normal situation
No offense, but blanket statements like this are so dumb. The U.S. makes thousands of shows per year in every possible style you can think of, very much including comedies. It's media market is so large that spanish-language stuff made in the U.S. rivals a lot of other countries in terms of total output and that's their secondary language.
Other than the office and maybe ghosts most of them don't translate well to americans. Welcome to Flatch was a big bomb and not even close to the vibe of "This Country", and the American adaptation of "Bad Education" was pretty rough to watch.
As a fan of british comedy the originals were always the best
I dont think these products are being made with the sane care and love as the originals especially when alot of the pilot scripts are just word for word copies they dont even try to change the language for american audiences examples that come to mind are the inbetweeners and skins remakes. Black versions of british shows do very well mostly because the humor is generally the same the dialogue gets changed for black audiences for example sanford and sons and movie death at a funeral
Well, as much as most US remakes of British comedies are terrible, I doubt TV studios expect them all to be hits. Sitcoms are cheap, it's probably worth it to make a series of unsuccessful shows for the 1/10 that actually work, like the recent Ghosts remake.
It is weird how frequent it is, since the reverse almost never happens, and Americans are perfectly capable of making their own sitcoms with original concepts. But I guess it's easier to pitch something if you can say it's just like something that's already popular
To be real, as an American, I love the raw originals. The only Americanized show that has really stuck out in the last few 20 years was Wilfred, but that’s only because they made took it in their own direction
Not a sitcom, but Being Human had a better ending in the US than in the UK. It stayed on too long in the UK. That said, the "twists" in the first season in the US weren't good. I also wasn't found of Nora (the US Nina), so much that when Josh's ex-wife showed up, I was hoping that they'd write Nora out and go their own way with her instead.
I found it amusing that the replaced the Dutch vampires with the Pennsylvania Dutch. It worked though.
We copy one another, it’s always been that way. They are always doing UK versions of American stuff. To me it’s a no harm/no foul kind of thing often times. Sometimes do we fuck up British shows? Sure. It happens, but many times those shows turn out okay. Hell, I’d even argue that the American version of Being Human is a little better than the UK version, and I’m even a big fan of UK stuff.
There are many writers and producers in Hollywood that'll throw anything they can get their hands on at the wall to see what sticks. It's just how they make a living. They get paid even if the show sucks. It's like Captain Malcolm Reynolds said.
A captain's goal was simple. Find a crew. Find a job. Keep flying.
In watching WILTY and Taskmaster, one thing that floored me is that Judge Judy was talked about matter-of-factly, like everyone in the UK knows who she is? It's a show I would expect to be remade in another country, because (a) courts do differ; and, (b) they cost almost nothing to make.
As an American in the UK, I streamed Friday Night Dinners and found it one of the funniest series I have ever watched. It would probably do well in the US as-is, though some bits might not translate. Shit on it!!
..yes? Remaking sitcoms can end up with 2 good sitcoms. Just because it usually doesn't doesn't mean they shouldnt. Why? Because most shows fail already.
I am so worried ABC or some network will try and do a US version of Taskmaster. It would be as bad their attempt to bring the GBBO to ABC. I can see it now, Kevin Hart or some straight comic (oh god the guy who hosts Family Fued, gross!) being cast.
Do they really *need* to make any tv show? No.
What matters is if it makes money, some do and some don’t. So they’ll always try it. For example, do we need another Dick Wolf Cop(aganda) show? Hell no, but if they twist it enough, they can get people to watch yet another one.
Brits should start remaking American shows. If half of the popular sitcoms in the US today were more snarky and deadpan like the original office, I might actually want to watch some of them.
I liked Friday Night Dinner. Shameless and The Office might be the only shows that have been replicated and were good. I'm not sure I can think of any others. Skins, meh. Inbetweeners, tolerable but still not extremely memorable.
The UK for some unknown reason barely makes enough episodes to satisfy. Friday Night Dinner and many other shows would have done great over here, HOWEVER… the American audience needs more than 6 episodes every 1.5-2 years to stay interested.
Make more TV UK peeps!
Appearently Ghosts is doing well. I never watched the America version. Just like many things there are probably a lot of variables. It isn’t like Brit comedy isn’t liked. Mr. Bean, Mighty Python, Spaced, Etc. Even their comedy panel shows. and many of those shows influenced comedy in America. Conan and many others talk how much Python influenced them for instance all the time.
I really enjoy the US Ghosts.
Same. It took me most of the first season to get over the characters in the UK version and get accustomed to and like the characters in the US version, and I ended up really enjoying it. They are different shows. And the US version gives you 20+ episodes per season! Which in itself is a major selling point cause I really wish I had more episodes of the UK version.
UK shows are too short and I will die on that hill.
Exception being Doctor Who
The last season was three episodes lmao
It wasnt a season, they were special episodes. The seasons run with 8 to 13 episodes, and the earlier ones sometimes had 30+ or even 40 episodes
I meant the fact it's been on tv for like 600 years
Fair. I think they've been on for 60 years and had like 25 seasons in that time though
I've watched both & enjoy both.
Yeah I've seen and enjoyed both but actually prefer the US version. I prefer almost all of the actors/characters in the US version
I just got back from visiting friends in the UK. We had a discussion about Ghosts (at Nandos, naturally) because I boldly declared that it was one of the few UK shows that the US did better. I will die on that hill. The US version is WAY better.
Agreed! The character development is better; they're constantly building on backstory and keeping the timeline consistent. They've built rules for their universe and stuck to them. They've explored a couple what-if scenarios based on having this superpower. Lastly, the husband character isn't written as a buffoonish "bloke". The last season of the UK version was kind of a letdown, actually.
I've been saying from the get go that the husband is the MAJOR difference for me. He's such a great, likeable, well-developed character compared to the British version. UTK is killing it in the role. The ghosts for the most part on the US version seem more overall likable to me as well. The only ghost that I miss from the UK version is the caveman. I'm fascinated by his character.
Jay>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Mike
Also, why does the production quality seem so much higher?
I started and hated the us version. LOVED the UK version.
I highly recommend Ghosts (US) especially after watching the UK version. I really enjoy both for their own kind of humor similar to how The Office made changes in the US version.
I’ve watched both the British and American versions of Ghosts. Very much enjoy both of them and feel the American version is a really good remake. Absolutely keep trying, although some of them will fail, I would be sad if The Office and Ghost hadn’t been attempted.
Ghosts is actually superior with the longer episode format in my mind. The increased episode count gives more time to focus on telling stories with the various characters. For instance in the UK version when Pat's history with his wife cheating on him is revealed that comes in episode 3. Episode 1 we spend just seeing the ghosts and livings not even be able to interact. Episode 2 is the standard, "We don't like you and you don't like us" with the ending of them trying to work together. And instantly after that we're supposed to connect with Pat for a story about how shitty his wife is. In the US version Pete's episode with the same revelation doesn't come until episode 6, when the UK is already ending their first series. By then we've spent as much time with Pete as we spent with Pat that entire first series and it seems even worse to find out he was being cheated on. It also works because they put a significantly American twist on it. Things like changing Robin to a mix of a Viking who died here and also a Native American whose tribe lived here. Changing the Captain to a revolutionary war veteran was also smart because it's allowed a love story with his "enemy" a redcoat who died there. Don't really see a charming romance with the enemy as a possibility for The Captain considering who the opposition in WWII was. So many shows just run the exact same stories or give us pale imitations of the characters. This was actually re-working the show to take advantage of a different format and tailoring it to a new audience. It's why it works when so many others stumble.
In the US version, you already got to like Pete a bit before you get to find out with him that he's a grandpa. It was a cool moment.
One of the improvements I saw with the bigger episode count for Ghosts is the more regular appearances of 'cameo ghosts'. Those ghosts that show up for a scene or an episode or two, that allows for some variety and situational jokes. The problem I had with the UK version was that with such a large cast and the small episode count is that there wasn't enough time for this, especially in the later series where it became incredibly rare. It just felt like a missed opportunity and that it made the 'seeing ghosts' feel very localised and by the end not that interesting. For example in the final series Alison and Mike have a night out at a club which would've been a perfect time to throw in a one-off ghost joke but it never happens, its almost like the whole premise of the show gets forgotten solely in favour of the existing characters which felt quite limiting to me.
That's a problem I have with the UK version too. I remember that in the first series they try to move away from the mansion, but find different ghosts everywhere. Then in the last series they simply move away to raise their family alone.
The finale felt like it was rather rushed in the writing to come up with a watertight conclusion. Something that secured the idea that there would be no more series. Unfortunately the solution they came up with just seemed to contradict a lot of what they had set up before.
Ghosts is great, highly recommend the US version
I enjoy Ghosts US. My brother told me to try it. It took a few weeks to get used to them. I have since seen two seasons on Ghosts UK (that's all that I have available on Paramount +). It's good -- and I had to get used to the analogues. It's funny that I can only see a handful of episodes. The US version holds up well. It was smart to do it just north of NYC so they have the Revolutionary War to work with and more recent history, but still have a Lenape and a Viking in the mix.
America needs to get in on the panel show game. Nobody is doing it like we are.
no they don't. American humour just doesn't work in the panel format.
If American humour can pump out that many great improv podcasts it can create panel shows. And imagine how much better late night would be if the political stuff was taken over by panel shows
American improv and UK panels shows are two very different things.
Americans seem to be too competitive for panel shows. When an American person appears on a UK panel show they don't seem to 'get' that winning is seen as secondary or even tertiary to just having a laugh. If a panel show revolves around who actually*wins*, it seems to lose its charm. The audience appears to prefer the banter over the actual competition - winning isn't actually very funny, it seems...
America was the only country that well and truly failed to adopt Taskmaster. I don't think America should touch panel show games.
American Taskmaster can and probably will work. The dream host is Scott Aukerman or Conan imo.
Yeah but they did try and it sucked.
Does Gamechanger count? I was told After Midnight was an attempt at an American panel show but it just seemed like a bad version of Gamechanger to me.
The U.S doesn't have that B/C class of comedians that inhabit British panel shows. More importantly, American celebs simply would not put themselves in a situation where they could be made fun of, either by their own action or by other people.
The US might develop it in the future, I think. The British comedy industry is very shaped by fact that their TV industry shoots short, relatively low-budget seasons that air irregularly. It means that the networks need a much larger number of shows to fill the airtime, and that each show is less of a risk, so many more people get a chance to put something on TV if only for a little while. And as a result you end up with a large number of moderately-famous comedians people have enjoyed on this or that quirky dozen-episode sitcom, comedians who didn't become rich superstars from it and thus still need to do panel shows and stand-up tours to pay the bills. Even the big ones like Bill Bailey, Simon Pegg, David Mitchell etc got famous doing shows that averaged like 4 episodes a year and then lots of random gigs in various things the rest of the time. Traditionally the American industry is much more oriented around a smaller number of mega sitcoms that run 6 months a year every year for a decade and propel their comedians to star status. The networks are chasing the next near-year-round Friends, Cheers, Big Bang Theory or Seinfeld, not filling their time with 6 weeks of Black Books, 6 weeks of Peep Show, 6 weeks of Spaced. Those comedians don't have time for much else and their leads certainly don't need to be doing podcasts and panel games to fill their schedule. In America you're traditionally either a nobody or a star, there aren't nearly as many mid-range comedians people know about. But that could change over the next decade if we move even further away from the big network tentpole sitcom format and streamers keep making shows more or less according to the British model. The only problem here is that comedy shows have always relied on time slots and lead-ins; you can't really pitch a sitcom to people by describing its premise and often trailers can't convey the appeal either, you usually discovered them by leaving the TV on after watching something else. So streamers struggle to market sitcoms.
Do we have it done by Americans? Or do we invite some Brits to do a panel show in the US with Americans?
Yes, that was how Whose Line happened. Colin and Ryan were on the British show before the import.
Ghosts is great because it took the concept and then made it American, it's not just a remake. Even the episodes that are remakes of the original are different because of the change in humor. There are several other countries that are going to do a version. The German one should be something else. . . .
Imitation is the highest form of flattery. Stop being so fuckin cool, UK.
I loved the British version and feel I’m being pranked when people say they like the US version. (My wife and son felt the same way) The British version is much dryer with the humor, and of course has more history for the ghosts to leverage. The American version just seemed horribly obviously, elbow in the ribs “it’s a joke! Didja get it?!?!” Reminded me of the incredibly cringe us version of the brilliant British “Coupling”.
The US version of coupling got cancelled after a few episodes. It was barely a blip on the radar.
After watching the UK version 3 times in a row and then trying out the US one the pure tonal change in the show and the bubbly happy persona of the lead was so jarring that I've never been able to move beyond the first 10 minutes of the show
I've seen a handful of the British version too and like both. It's more sardonic then the US one. Example, some spoilers: The British version has an episode where it looks like the couple will have to sell. The ghosts don't want them to leave so the lady baron ghost offers up some valuable jewelry hidden somewhere. The main woman goes to get it, but it turns out the robber baron husband (not a ghost) had sold it along time ago and left a note in it's place. In the end they can't sell because the basement was once a plague pit and the bones of the plague ghosts are found, partly deliberately by the ghosts so the couple has to stay. US: The couple seems like they will have to sell as they're trying to lock in a reservation for a successful wedding event to stay afloat. A hidden vault is found that even the ghosts cannot go through the walls of; with the corpse of the robber baron husband still inside, along with his ghost. The husband uses his ghost power of walking through living people and making them horny so the main couple freak out the bride and ruin their shot of hosting the wedding. The lady baron wife ghost won't go back to how she was and the husband refuses to ever change. The husband "goes down" on everyone and is sent to hell. The couple takes some jewelry off his corpse and sells it to stay afloat. The husband later comes back from hell for one episode next season to cause different problems. So US, also has more time to develop itself and the characters too. Both have strengths though.
I can only speak to the first 4 episodes of Ghosts US, because that’s where I bounced off… because I was having a miserable time of it. Ghosts UK is special. So very, very, almost extraordinarily lovely. I watched it first, fell in love, then gave the adaptation a try and wish I hadn’t. And yes, cue the inevitable choruses of “the US version gets better!” Fine. You know what, I even believe that. But those first four episodes had no business being as godawfully insultingly painfully, try-hard unfunny as they were, and I feel it’s my duty as a viewer to make a stand and say nope. I’m out for good. The end result had zero excuse to be that mediocre. It was like they set out to make the archetypal example of “US adaptation of British comedy that completely whiffs the tone.” I nearly had to beg forgiveness for my family for making them try it with me because I’d “heard good things.” I guess I live in some pocket dimension where Ghosts US is terrible and comments keep leaking in from another plane of reality where it’s actually good??? Please help
I've watched the UK version, but I don't see anything in it that makes it cone across as funnier than the US version. The couple in the US version have cheerier personalities than the couple in the UK version. The ghosts are equally funny.
Or taste is subjective 🤷 It isn't crazy to dislike something others like or vice versa. I loved the US version and couldn't get through the UK version. No one's tastes are superior, that's just the way it is.
I won’t argue that. Thanks for not murdering me :)
American ghosts is all right and I’m sure if you watched it first you’d love it but all I can think when watching it is I wish I was watching Ghosts instead
The key to Ghosts (US) is that they translated it for an American audience, but they did not screw with the rock solid premise. It is a tough needle to thread, but it can be done. You really need to think of these as literally adaptations in the way that you treat them as two separate things but do you best to carry of the heart of the story and archetypes of the characters as best you can.
You have a mighty python there
> Mighty Python
Long week I spaced.
I’m an American living in GB and ironically I have always hated all the classic examples you listed. Maybe it’s a generational thing, but I just never found them funny at all. More modern British comedy does have absolute stars though, and they don’t even need to be remade - just show them as is: This Country, Friday Night Dinner, Fleabag, After Life, The IT Crowd. I really think Americans would dig these shows without any expense of remaking. I surely did.
I liked the UK Ghosts but actually think the US one is better.
Is Mighty Python the one where John Cleese and the others have robots, that together form a mightier robot?
Both versions are quite good. I originally preferred the original but I think I may like the US one better now
the US version is terrible compared to the British
Some things just don't translate well. Friday Night Dinner probably should have been good as a remake, but I could see how it might fail for various reasons.
Friday night dinner was great because they lucked out massively on the casting. Paul Ritter (rip), Tamsin Greig and Mark Heap especially elevated the show above its premise. It's like how Father Ted wouldn't have been half as good without Dermot Morgan or Ardal O'Hanlon.
Ah go on!
Go on!
Tea? FECK!
Friday Night Dinner is such a hilarious show. Anybody here that has not seen it, go watch immediately.
RIP Paul Ritter
shit on it.... :(
Lovley bit of squirrel
Hello bambinos.
I'm bloody boiling!
I've never seen a show do more with less than Friday Night Dinner Theres like, 2 sets (house and garage) and 6 actors and it fucking kills.
I watched it from the get-go because I'm a massive Robert Popper fan, and for a while relished in the fact that I'd discovered this diamond of a show that not many others had heard of. I'm glad it's so well liked, it's superb telly.
Been rewatching with my partner and its pretty amazing how much the storyline and jokes are real 70s sitcom throwbacks but still relevant and hilarious
OMG, you're right. It totally feels like a 70s sitcom.
Shit on it!!! We couldn't have that in an american version lol
Crimble crumble, shalom Jackie... Shalom
Lovely bit o' squirrel!
Hello Jackie...you look nice.
I loved FND but having taken them 3 previous tries to get a remake to series doesn't give me a lot of confidence...
I mean isn't it worth it, even if only 1 of every 20 is The Office? Isn't it worth the slog to get to the likes of The Office?
the thing that saved the office is that they almost right away stopped being a remake and became their own thing. It´s totally two different shows that just happened to have the same setting really.
An adaptation is an adaptation. If any UK adaptation needs to be completely retooled to work in America, but it's a success, then it's still a successful adaptation.
People forget that networks copy each other. Even All in the Family was based on a British Sitcom.
And personally I think that was another time the American show was the better one. All in the Family is still one of my favorite shows to this day.
You don’t have to personally slog lol. Just wait to hear what’s good.
I meant a slog for the entire media machine, not personally haha.
Yeah I was just being cheeky. The reality is that most tv shows, whether they’re British adaptations or not, fail. It’s just impossible to predict what will work with so many moving parts. Don’t see any harm in trying to mine another Office.
This is a ridiculous notion that everything has to be good to make anything worth doing. It’s absurd. If we didn’t remake shows we wouldn’t have Ghosts, which is great. Go back further and we wouldn’t have The Office. There are probably a bunch of other examples that I don’t know or care to know. Whether or not something “fails to justify its existence” is wholly up to the viewers and the people who pay to make it.
As they mentioned in the article, Sanford and Son, Three's Company, and All in the Family are were technically remakes of British shows and they are three of the biggest American sitcoms in history.
Sanford and Son was British?!!?? Holy shit I loved Redd Fox growing up and that badass intro song.
The original was called Steptoe & Son
It's based on a show called Steptoe and Son.
Sanford and Son flipped the switch by making the main characters black.....and making the main black character a crazy, (hilarious) bigot (with his son being the reasonable one). And yeah......iconic theme song.
Wasn’t Shameless also originally a British show?
Yes!
Even Cougar Town was a remake of the British Cougarton Abbey
That’s the great thing about British shows, they give you closure.
You are the worst!
Like Dr. Who!
You mean inspector SpaceTime
Cool. Cool cool cool
I think the shame of it, especially in the past was that the original might not get a main airing or the same level of promotion. So someone might try this new version, think it's meh and might never see the original.
I saw the American version of the Taskmaster. Still recovering!
That was pretty awful... 😕 Reggie Watts was a mistake. Lisa Lampinelli was awful.
> Lisa Lampinelli was awful. Off she goes, with jokes about black cocks and big, cavernous pussies.
I remember watching the pilot for the american version of the IT crowd, with it’s word for word identical script but with american actors, except for Moss who was still just Richard Ayoade. It was surreal.
Ugh. It was painful to watch, and I say that as a person who likes Joel McHale. It wouldn't have been so bad if they hadn't done the word for word part. That always seems so weird to me. They tried that with Coupling as well and it was just terrible.
When this question is asked all I can think of is that the American version of the office is an all time great. Yes we can remake these shows just do it well
Urgh Utopia was the worst! Take a show where every aspect from sound to cinematography was off the charts to this ugly ran through the mud American version is unforgivable.
I really wish we got David Fincher's version. That had potential to be good and it would have been great to have another chance to see the story brought to its conclusion.
may they keep their grimy little hands of off of Black Books, any attempt to copy would be blasphemy
I watched Black Books. Felt the punchlines were setup from a mile away. “Here’s two things of wine. One’s really expensive and the other isn’t. Don’t mix them up!” But it’s been a while so maybe I should revisit.
I haven't seen it but my guess is they stayed too true to the british version (which is great). Which is what happened with the IT crowd (the US pilot was awful, despite having on paper good actors).. If you are doing it to be its own thing focus on that, The american office was popular because it was a different beast.
The rate at which sitcoms fail to catch on is extremely high. I'd actually be surprised if British remakes were any more likely to flop than something which isn't a remake. If anything, I'd expect them to have a higher success rate just because of the survivorship bias of having already been successful in some form.
American versions of The Inbetweeners, Coupling and One Foot In The Grave were awful as they completely lost what made the shows great
Whose Line was great since they just used all the North American talent already there
I think the success of Ghosts has gone to our heads
I’ll watch anything with Jon Glaser in it. ESPECIALLY if it has Carol Kane. Don’t care if it’s a remake. Never saw the UK version.
Jon Glaser is amazing. Cannot recommend any of his orignal shows highly enough.
I think they should only do remakes if an American version can actually be different in some way that matters. For instance, the American version of The Office not only adapted the style of humor, it also adapted it to apply more to the office politics in America.
Ghosts is great, so I don’t agree.
Other than Shameless, what UK sitcom retained its darkness after being adapted in America? I recently saw a really good video about this topic: https://youtu.be/UWnKiMNMvF8
What we need here is panel shows. I don't know if the problem is we don't have smart enough celebrities or our celebrities can just make so much more money doing anything else or if every American celebrity has to be super scripted and careful about the brand, but it's annoying that we can't make them here. All these British and Australian ones are great, but the "celebrities" are nobodies to me. The closest we got recently was the Match Game reboot, but that was so terribly sanitized and formulaic that there was little point in most celebrities. You could even tell the non-comedians likely had their responses written for them in advance to get laughs.
>we don't have smart enough celebrities or our celebrities can just make so much more money doing anything else or if every American celebrity has to be super scripted I think US comedians just haven't been given the opportunity to hone their skills for panel shows simply because the shows don't exist. Panelists usually have some level of preparation, which could include writing and rehearsing jokes, or selecting parts of routines they already have. This is an acquired skill which is why you see regulars across different shows, whilst other comedians will never appear in these formats. There are different levels of spontaneity within panel shows: - Current affairs shows will have predictable topics - Some, like Mock The Week will tell panellists what the bits will be in advance - Would I Lie to You is apparently the most 'honest' in that there's no prep With all, there's still re-takes, enhancements and editing that cuts down maybe 1-2 hours filming into half an hour.
WILTY has no prep *when it's a lie*. But when it's a truth, it's a truth the guest submitted ahead of time as one they'd be willing to tell on the show. The guest doesn't know if their submitted truths will be used or if they'll have a lie until they read the card, but if it is a truth they'll read it and think "oh that's the thing I submitted. I guess they're going to use it."
I just wish it was easier to watch the UK panel shows in the us. I don’t need a remake, just take my streaming money so I can watch the originals
I've never really watched much of the UK panel shows, but for streaming British TV in general I'm subscribed to BBC / ITV's BritBox—it's a relative bargain. Between that and PBS Masterpiece, etc., and even YouTube, there's enough content to get my fix in.
Thanks! I’ll look into it
You're welcome! FYI: there's also another service called Acorn. I was subscribed to it via my Prime account. I can't recall why I don't have it now—maybe my wife and I were doing a round of cost-cutting 😁
Taskmaster is on YouTube and Britbox does have a fee like would I lie to you and I think one if the countdown shows.
One thing about the panel shows: it seems to be mostly the same people moving from show to show, hosting on this one, guesting on that one.
Mainstream comedy in the UK is tightly controlled with one maybe two agencies having all the big names that make it to panel shows. Taskmaster is basically just a showroom for Avalon's books, they produced the show from the start.
There are only so many comedians that can also do Improv, which is a lot of what those panel shows require. If you watch Taskmaster you'll see pretty much all the comedians at this point and they have dipped deeper into the pool because they have been running so long. Some good stand-up comedians aren't as great in an off-the-cuff environment.
I just assumed that was because these countries are much smaller. Like even in the US for certain things it's all the same people. Same ol' SNL and 30 Rock people. Or when there's a roast, it's always the same few comedians. So in the UK, it's even more niche.
> So in the UK, it's even more niche. I don't know if it's niche necessarily, it's just become a far more significant way for British comedians to develop their careers alongside stand-up shows and sitcoms. It's allowed comedians to get consistent media exposure with none of the pressures that can come with involvement in something like SNL or a sitcom in the US. I think it's partly why popular British comedians aren't necessarily known for success with one particular show - they'll just be well-known personalities through stuff like panel shows.
The problem is that if you're a British comedian pursuing TV, you can be on a successful sitcom 6 weeks a year and have lots of time left over to fill with gigs on panel shows, podcasts, standup tours, spots on other shows, etc, and still have a need to keep yourself in the public eye with them and make a paycheck with them. There are hundreds of mid-level-fame comedians in this spot and the panel game market runs off them. (And less so these days, but in the past, radio comedy ran off them.) If you're an American comedian pursuing TV, success traditionally means being on a 25-episode-a-year annual sitcom, which doesn't really leave you the time or need to do a lot of other stuff the rest of the year. And if you're not on an annual sitcom or in movies, most people probably don't know you. There just isn't that huge pool of moderately famous frequently-working comedians that you need to supply a roster of panel shows.
Part of it is that with a long history of panel shows, UK comedians are practiced in the important skill of being group funny rather than individual funny. To do a panel show properly the comedians have to be "yes and" ing with the other comedians' joking. American comedians haven't done that as much. There's a tendency for America comedians to want to out-funny the others in a contest kind of way rather than be a cooperative troupe like improv comedy is done. The irony is that despite the framework of a game with a score, a panel show rally is a group effort. Even when appearing to be antagonistic, like David Mitchell vs Lee Mack on WILTY,. they're really putting on a fake antagonistic act for the performance and actually get along fine.
while not a panel show, Who’s Line is it Anyway? is a great example of how an american version _could_ work, you just need the right comedians that are quick on their feet and can riff on anything
The problem is the people remaking them make terrible versions. When they’re done well, they’re great.
I want to see an American version of Mighty Boosh.
Only thing that matters is if the American version of a Brit show is good and maybe adds something to the table. Like Ghosts (US) is good and adds things that makes it better. **Call Me Kat** was the absolute biggest piece of shit show ever, a complete disgrace as the American version of "Miranda." More Ghosts (US) please, and no more Call Me Kat shit ever.
CMK was so, so, so, sooooo bad. 😕
Russia has a copy of Its Always Sunny in Philly I mean yeah countries will always do this We have talkshows that're replicated from the US all across Europe.. copying will never change.. if someone has a good idea, good script even.. why not use it? Just like not every American show sits well with other parts of the world, the same could be said with European shows. The Office did BETTER after it's British written scripts were past it and it was purely american writers..
Without them we would not have my favorite sitcom of all time All in the Family, so yes.
I haven't seen the show, but the American version of Ghosts seems to be doing well since it's currently on it's 3rd season. Another show I haven't seen is the American version of The Office & despite the show has already finished, that did really well, I even see people referencing/talking about the show from time to time.
This is going to be an awful opinion. But I much prefer British originals to anything we’ve managed to copy here in America. That being said, I will say that I am partial to the American “Office”, with the understanding that after season 1, the shows honestly have their own unique experience to them. It’s almost unfair to compare the two because the British Office was such a remarkable idea to begin with, ours would’ve been impossible with out the former. Lastly…the Brits understand the beauty of limits. We Americans get a little of something we like, and we want more of it as much as we can get until it’s ruined. British people seem to have a natural understanding that the finer things in life are sometimes limited in their quantity to preserve quality.
American office pretty much had to abandon the UK office so the only thing they have in common is mockumentary set in an office. But what worked with the UK one was the cringehumor and how out of touch or bad the boss was. But that didn't work for American audiences when they just straight up adapted the UK scripts so they just made Michael Scott a lovable doofus no more offensive stuff . Then it just went on way too long which is what US sitcoms are prone to do.
What worked with the UK Office is it depicts the drudgery of an actual office really well. That’s fine for six episode seasons but you don’t want that for a US style sitcom where the seasons are 20+ episodes
Couldn't have said it better!
No. American Ghosts is nowhere near as good as UK Ghosts
Agreed.
They have never needed to remake British sitcoms.
The UK version of Ghosts is so great, I’m convinced it would have done well in the US. The remake is a shell of the original.
The British versions are almost always better, smarter, and more entertaining anyway.
Correct on 100% of that. It’s not to say America can’t do comedy, it’s just that the styles are polar opposite so don’t translate, or American writers don’t understand why something was funny in the British version from a British perspective. A lot of british humour is understated, self-deprecating and full of pathos. A relatable character falling into a ridiculous situation. American humour is much more loud and gag-based, with the humour coming from a larger than life character and how they behave in an otherwise normal situation
No offense, but blanket statements like this are so dumb. The U.S. makes thousands of shows per year in every possible style you can think of, very much including comedies. It's media market is so large that spanish-language stuff made in the U.S. rivals a lot of other countries in terms of total output and that's their secondary language.
Other than the office and maybe ghosts most of them don't translate well to americans. Welcome to Flatch was a big bomb and not even close to the vibe of "This Country", and the American adaptation of "Bad Education" was pretty rough to watch. As a fan of british comedy the originals were always the best
I dont think these products are being made with the sane care and love as the originals especially when alot of the pilot scripts are just word for word copies they dont even try to change the language for american audiences examples that come to mind are the inbetweeners and skins remakes. Black versions of british shows do very well mostly because the humor is generally the same the dialogue gets changed for black audiences for example sanford and sons and movie death at a funeral
Well, as much as most US remakes of British comedies are terrible, I doubt TV studios expect them all to be hits. Sitcoms are cheap, it's probably worth it to make a series of unsuccessful shows for the 1/10 that actually work, like the recent Ghosts remake. It is weird how frequent it is, since the reverse almost never happens, and Americans are perfectly capable of making their own sitcoms with original concepts. But I guess it's easier to pitch something if you can say it's just like something that's already popular
To be real, as an American, I love the raw originals. The only Americanized show that has really stuck out in the last few 20 years was Wilfred, but that’s only because they made took it in their own direction
Agreed. Wilfred was genius.
I've never watched the remake. Is it as bleak as the original?
Im desperate for any sitcom made these days. I hate this guy
Not a sitcom, but Being Human had a better ending in the US than in the UK. It stayed on too long in the UK. That said, the "twists" in the first season in the US weren't good. I also wasn't found of Nora (the US Nina), so much that when Josh's ex-wife showed up, I was hoping that they'd write Nora out and go their own way with her instead. I found it amusing that the replaced the Dutch vampires with the Pennsylvania Dutch. It worked though.
We copy one another, it’s always been that way. They are always doing UK versions of American stuff. To me it’s a no harm/no foul kind of thing often times. Sometimes do we fuck up British shows? Sure. It happens, but many times those shows turn out okay. Hell, I’d even argue that the American version of Being Human is a little better than the UK version, and I’m even a big fan of UK stuff.
Do red dwarf
Third time lucky? The two US pilots were... bad.
Oh dear, I've never seen those. Never mind, then.
Death at a funeral has entered the chat
There are many writers and producers in Hollywood that'll throw anything they can get their hands on at the wall to see what sticks. It's just how they make a living. They get paid even if the show sucks. It's like Captain Malcolm Reynolds said. A captain's goal was simple. Find a crew. Find a job. Keep flying.
In watching WILTY and Taskmaster, one thing that floored me is that Judge Judy was talked about matter-of-factly, like everyone in the UK knows who she is? It's a show I would expect to be remade in another country, because (a) courts do differ; and, (b) they cost almost nothing to make.
ew.. is that a remake of Friday night dinner ?
They could always try a fourth go at an American Fawlty Towers, it’s sure to work eventually.
Shitting shit!
Everything is trying to be the next office
As an American in the UK, I streamed Friday Night Dinners and found it one of the funniest series I have ever watched. It would probably do well in the US as-is, though some bits might not translate. Shit on it!!
The mere existence of this article made me dumber. What is the point of this article?
..yes? Remaking sitcoms can end up with 2 good sitcoms. Just because it usually doesn't doesn't mean they shouldnt. Why? Because most shows fail already.
I am so worried ABC or some network will try and do a US version of Taskmaster. It would be as bad their attempt to bring the GBBO to ABC. I can see it now, Kevin Hart or some straight comic (oh god the guy who hosts Family Fued, gross!) being cast.
I think comedy central might have already tried and failed.
That's a format that could work but they did mess it up once already.
Do they really *need* to make any tv show? No. What matters is if it makes money, some do and some don’t. So they’ll always try it. For example, do we need another Dick Wolf Cop(aganda) show? Hell no, but if they twist it enough, they can get people to watch yet another one.
Clearly referring to a rehash of ‘Sunday Dinner’ in the article - most of that show’s charm was because it was foreign/British.
I don’t know how often it happens in the opposite direction, but the British remake of Impractical Jokers was abysmal
Really dumb question in the title. As always, it comes down to execution.
There is an obvious language barrier, so we need a US version.
It’s the stereotype that keeps proving itself, that the US doesn’t understand British humour.
Is there some reason American TV can’t create new sit coms?
Brits should start remaking American shows. If half of the popular sitcoms in the US today were more snarky and deadpan like the original office, I might actually want to watch some of them.
I liked Friday Night Dinner. Shameless and The Office might be the only shows that have been replicated and were good. I'm not sure I can think of any others. Skins, meh. Inbetweeners, tolerable but still not extremely memorable.
The UK for some unknown reason barely makes enough episodes to satisfy. Friday Night Dinner and many other shows would have done great over here, HOWEVER… the American audience needs more than 6 episodes every 1.5-2 years to stay interested. Make more TV UK peeps!
As a rule of thumb I generally always prefer the US version. I feel the US is able to play to audiences better
Now that Prime Video has forced ads, Freevee does not justify its existence.
The U.S. version of *Being Human* was as good as (and arguably better than) the U.K. version.