You know what I mean. They’ll take a show that is really popular, either in a single country, or in many countries, and not only will they replace actors and actresses with Americans, they’ll change the entire format of the show, or take it in a new direction.
Top Gear is a fantastic show and is extremely popular all over the world. Just 2 weeks ago, Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz were on it because they asked if it was ok. Not every country gets the British humour or knows who the presenters are, but many countries have bought the rights to it and show the program. But America has decided to completely “Americanize” it.
Who Do You Think You Are, British show, bought by other commonwealth countries who have kept the format, style, graphics, etc but have made shows for their own famous people. America’s program is totally changed. There are lots of recaps, they halved the time of the show, they also “annoyingly” show the conclusion of the show several times before the end of the show.
Don’t get me wrong. This is NOT a go at America as a whole. I just don’t understand why networks feel the need to do this. Is the USA that different that the TV-watching public can’t watch a foreign program?
In all seriousness, yes. It isn’t that there aren’t any well-written foreign TV shows, it is that most Americans aren’t used to seeing them and the production values always seem a little off to American viewers. American TV is shot in a certain style with very high production values and foreign shows look a little odd when flipping through channels. For a good concept to be successful with American audiences as a whole, it does need to be remade to fit in with other American TV shows. The reverse isn’t true because so many American TV shows and movies are exported.
This phenomenon gave us Sanford and Son which was a remake of a popular British show and I am thankful for that.
You said it yourself, not every country gets the British humor or knows who the presenters are.
All part of the fine tradition of “padding” several episodes worth of material over an entire season. To see how it’s really done, I suggest watching a few weeks of an American soap opera.
Accents and idioms aside, American TV is different (not better, just different.) Things like camera angles, lighting, set design and pacing are different around the world. While other countries may find the particular style of a British version to be appropriate for their own audiences (or at least not cost-effective enough to be worth changing) American producers feel it’s worth the investment of completely gutting and revising a show to make it more “American.”
I get what you mean but my brain can’t comprehend. As hard as I try, I can’t visualise seeing a TV program of another country and find it so different that I wouldn’t watch it. It’s baffling.
There is also a large streak of provencialism involved. If we didn’t make it, it is by definition inferior. Toss in the egos involved. Stir well and serve.
I’m pretty sure the people creating the American version don’t actually care about the other stuff - it’s the ego. Apparently the film business (movie and tv) are hugely ego-driven. Even if it was wildly successful, you would’t get as many props for buying another a show as for copying it. Why? No idea.
There are plenty of Americans who “don’t understand” British accents, let alone British humor. They automatically turn off anything that sounds “funny” to them. US shows have to account for this – you’re crippling your chances if your target audiences get turned off by the accents.
US cable shows are designed to catch channel surfers. Hence, the recaps: someone who just landed on the channel can get up to speed and keep watching.
Rightly or wrongly, US producers think that Americans can’t get British humor. There are enough Americans who say this to make it a factor you can’t acknowledge.
Cultural differences are a factor. “The Office” has versions for the US, France, and Germany. Workplaces in the three countries are different and you need to factor that in. See this article.
On the contrary: If it’s foreign—or at least if it’s British—it’s by definition superior, meaning highbrow and cultural and artsy and hard to understand and not something you’d actually watch when you just want to relax and be entertained. (I am tempted to call this the “Benny-Hill-on-PBS Phenomenon.”)
It’s not as if the opposite never occurs - The British show “Coupling” has been referred as the “British Friends.” Why can’t Brits make their own shows about 6 friends, all 20/30-somethings, who spend their time talking about sex and life without ripping off the US?
I may be off base on this but I think it’s all about $s.
If I approach a network with a British show I have the US right’s to, I can show them a few episodes and offer them the chance to re-run it on their network.
OR I can show them a few episodes, sell them on the concept, and explain the mind bogglingly large budget I’ll need to produce a US version – because after all it needs to be tailored to a US audience.
Anything involving Gordon Ramsay is the worst for this. Kitchen Nightmares, is a very thoughtful show about people who are actually trying very hard yet for reasons of their own making they’re not succeeding. In this scenario having a successful chef come and help give advice and reinvigorate you can actually make a difference. But not always, sometimes they fail but crucially they do it on their own merits -there’s no fucking fairy godmother style makeover.
Kitchen Nightmares US is just about the freakshow of watching crazy people then - oh look everything’s better! So much of this is down to the direction, narration and production which is millions times better on the UK version.
Pretty much the same for Masterchef right now.
And with Top Gear, from the trailers I’ve seen the production values of the US version are nowhere near as high as the BBC version, I should probably withhold my judgement but I can already see how its going to turn out.
So yeah, I actually think that most American reality TV (That gets shipped over here) is actually very poorly produced and has rubbish production values. American drama series though, like 24, Dexter, Battlestar Galactica pretty much eclipse everything else in the world.
While I’m on the topic - recaps suck, that stupid grey filter to show things are bad then look everything’s vibrant! is retarded, the overly dramatic music and PLEASE STOP CRYING!
On the other hand things like the Office work out well, so I guess it depends.
Though The Office from America is drastically different in tone than the British original; enough so that liking one most definitely does not mean one would like the other.
It’s about copying ideas, and about building on a franchise. It’s easier to market something ‘based on the successful hit show from Botswana!’ than it is to start something from whole cloth.
This. I watch at least one episode of Doctor Who a day, and I pretty much always miss at least one chunk of dialog because I can’t understand an actor’s dialect. Estuarian English is sometimes difficult for American ears. (But I love British humor.)
Yes, Americans are so stupid that shows like The Office need to be simplified for them.
But then again, it could be a money issue. By recasting everybody, they get more money or more rights or something like that. My WAG would be if they took it whole hog and broadcast it in the US, they would lose the DVD/syndication money. By creating a new show, they keep it.
In a nutshell: if you can’t understand why they do things a certain way in the US, the answer is always money, stupidity, or both.
Then you can toss in the fact that, with the exception of SyFy, most American networks and production companies have production values that are light-years ahead of British television until very recently. I’ve seen cable access shows that put the production values of Dr. Who and Blake’s 7, for example, to shame.
So, incomprehensible humor and dialects, lousy production values, and lack of total control over the product and the subsequent profits means everything gets reworked. Simple really.
