(First time thread poster so if its in the wrong place please forgive :D)
Why do the US try and remake a great UK TV show for accross the pond - Look at :-
**Red Dwarf **- the US one was totally crap - both pilots where crap and lost the whole premis of the show. Dave Lister was a ordinary guy who was a shortish, fattish and slobbishness hippy type and the US has a Tall, fit good looking guy in the role and we where ment to believe he had the same problems as the UK Dave or any of us ordinary types…
Coupling - They took a top shelve all round hillarious show and stripped the humor out of it - for what - was it to funny for the US or to sexually deviant - yes Jeff we are talking about you - for the US…
**Shamless **- Never watched it but read the reviews
The Office - Bit better but still…
Faulty Towers - with Bea Arthur in the John Cleese part (3 attempts wher made) but…
Why Oh Why do they do this - I cant think of this being done with any US to UK shows - we accept the US homour without any issues - some stuff we dont really understand but hey it set in the US why should we understand all the stuff.
Can you imagin a UK version of Friends or My Name is Earl ???
Also heard that about Coupling but that was because it had 6 people - 3 guys and 3 Girls - that was the only reall similarity. Its like saying that Time Tunnel was a US version of Dr Who because it was about time travel.
Most of those are quiz or reality shows but it goes to show that its a 2 way thing - never heard of the Brighton Bells or Married for Life and the Golden Girls and Married… With Children are among my all time favorites. May have to see if I can get a copy of those 2 to see just how bad they did with classic American Shows.
Also if they did as bad a job as the US did with the ones I mentioned - will I really want to look them up?:dubious:
I know 3’s company was a remake of Man about the House - which I had seen but never really liked - I liked the UK 1 and both its spin offs. the other 2 where before my time - well I have seen Steptoe and Sun with Harry H Corbet and Till Death do we Part - with Tony Blairs (UK Prime Minister) Father inlaw in it.
I don’t have any proof, but I suspect that there’s plenty of cross-pollination both ways, but that for whatever reason, the American TV people are more blatant about remaking British shows than the other way around.
Personally, I attribute it to the same abject lack of creativity and risk-aversion that gets us gems like a remake of “Footloose” or big screen versions of TV shows that have been off the air for nearly 20 years.
Yes - with these few posts I already see the cross overs - reallity and quiz shows aside I see a larger 2 way thing than I realised. as for the old TV show stuff - I agree. A-Team was OK, Starsky and Hutch was crap and Charlies Angles was great - well the first movie anyway. all seems to be a hit and miss - but why not just leave something that is successful as is and not try and remake it for the local market - can you imagine how a UK version of Monk or Friends or The Big Bank Theory would look - NO THANKS
I was thinking along the lines of Episodes where a UK hit was being made in the US and then changed to fit - I supose its the same the other way so why do TV Execs take a hit and export it and change it beyond all recognision?
Take one of your examples - say, The Office. Are you suggesting that a network that wants a show to run years at 20+ episodes a year should simply take the two series of six UK episodes, broadcast them, and be done with it?
The US broadcast model doesn’t work that way. It needs lots of episodes every year for years at a time. Unless Ricky Gervais has a secret cache of hundreds of unshown episodes to let them use, they’re gonna have to make their own version.
Same goes for Coupling, Fawlty Towers, and the other shows you mentioned.
Another thing to note is the difference in length between US series (almost always 22 episodes per year) and UK series (often 6 or 8 episodes per year). A UK TV show that lasts for 22 episodes (3 series, in UK terms) would be considered a hit, wouldn’t it? So if a US TV producer sees something that lasted for 22+ episodes elsewhere, that’s a good sign that it might have the same amount of success (at least) in the US. In theory.
In practice, I don’t know if borrowed concepts have a better success rate than the home-grown concepts.
EDIT: Candyman74 was obviously thinking along the same lines.
The problem is that what makes a show popular in the UK might not work in the US. The Office made changes to the characterization and the mood in order to succeed outside the UK (See this article).
The problem is to figure out what changes need to be made and what don’t. Some changes are necessary, but the producers don’t make the right choices. Or there’s no way to create an equivalent. Or they decide to add things that just don’t work. Or casting necessitates changes (in the UK Fawlty Towers, Basil was the central character; everyone else existed primarily to frustrate him. In the US version, though, you have Bea Arthur involved, so she would have to have a more prominent role, which changed the focus for the worse).
There are other factors. The American version of Coupling was terrible despite the fact that the pilot used the same story and much of the same dialog as the first episode of the UK version. But the actors were not as good, and their line readings weren’t funny. It was leaden, while the original was great.
The shorter UK season is a factor, but only if you’re remaking the scripts. The bigger issue is the changes in the conception when you try to appeal to a different audience.
I did not realise the 22+ episodes was an issue - never even though of that - Always likes that things like Monk and such lasted the full year and yes a full season in the UK with 13 Episodes was far more popular than a 6 episode one - but it makes more sense now. Thanks for that . Clarety is a wonderful thing
Note that the first series of the US version of Shameless ran twelve episodes, as will the second series. The show airs on the premium cable channel Showtime, which is probably why the series are shorter than the 22 episodes typical of broadcast network shows.
Meanwhile, the current eighth series of the UK original is running 22 episodes, and so will the ninth series. (The first seven series ran from 7 to 16 episodes and averaged just under twelve episodes.)
Someone has already given the list of British TV programs made from American ones. Here’s the list of American TV programs made from British ones:
There was a short period in the 1960’s when several British TV programs were shown on commercial networks in the U.S. This included shows like The Prisoner, Secret Agent, and The Avengers. These were espionage shows, and the popularity of James Bond movies might have lead the networks to decide that such shows would be popular. After that, the only British TV shows to be shown on American TV have been on PBS (the Public Broadcasting System, the only noncommercial network). I suspect that what happened was that American TV production companies went to all the commercial networks and said, “If you continue to show foreign-made TV shows on your networks, it will kill our business. It’s possible to make the shows cheaper in foreign countries, so we won’t be able to compete with them. You WILL NOT show such programs. If you want the same ideas, we can remake them for you. Let PBS show those foreign programs. We can spread the notion that PBS is only for intellectual snobs, so PBS will get only a small cult audience for anything.”
The same is true for why so few foreign movies are shown in American movies theaters (except for about one theater in each city that specializes in foreign films). The American film distribution companies have similarly told the big movie theater chains that they aren’t to show foreign movies (with some rare exceptions). They know that they can’t make films as cheaply as it’s possible to do outside the U.S., so they have to badger the big theater chains into not showing foreign films and make sure that the few theaters which show foreign films are portrayed as being strictly for intellectual snobs.
And I have always felt that the worst episode of the US The Office was the very first one, which was the only one (IIRC) to be based on one of the UK scripts.
Interesting speculation, but totally devoid of any facts to back it up.
In theaters, foreign films are not popular if they’re not in English. That’s a given, and you don’t need the studios to tell theater owners that. But films made in English by UK-based production companies are certainly welcomed by the studios, who, after all, are the ones distributing the films in the US, which gives them a chance to add to their profits with a much lower investment than if they produced a film themselves.
I doubt anything like you speculate happened in TV, either. Of the three you mention, The Prisoner was only aired in the US as a summer replacement. The other two were successes, but Secret Agentnever got particularly good ratings (and was also bought as a summer replacement) and was replaced by the ultimately more successful Mission: Impossible. The Avengers was a success from the start – ABC spent a (relative) fortune on it, but ABC was the lowest-rated network in the 60s and was willing to do anything. And you’re forgetting British flops of the era like The Champions (also a summer replacement).
So the networks were importing the UK series for summer replacements (other than The Avengers) because they gave cheap new programming instead of reruns.
Law & Order: UK seems to be doing all right, even though the early episodes were direct remakes of American originals. Personally, I keep waiting for the crushing memorable punchlines that were delivered by Michael Moriarty or Sam Waterston and I keep getting disappointed. Oh, well…
- well I have seen Steptoe and Sun with Harry H Corbet and Till Death do we Part - with Tony Blairs (UK Prime Minister) Father inlaw in it.