International TV adaptions: comparing and contrasting

[Mel O'Drama]

Are remakes ever a good thing?

The list of UK-US adaptions seems significantly larger than the the US-UK adaptions. I'd say Brits adapt more reality TV and game shows, but are quicker to reject imitations when it comes to scripted television.

(I've posted lists from these two countries because they're the easiest to source, but I'm hoping we'll cover some more territory).

I'm interested to know if there any that are as good as - or better than - the original. Not that this should stop us outing the terrible remakes as well.

 

[Angela Channing]

Brighton Belles was an awful UK remake of the sublime Golden Girls.

The UK remark of Law and Order was pretty good but no where near as good as the US original.

I was a big fan of the UK version of House of Cards with Ian Richardson but felt the US remake with Kevin Spacey was as good as, if not better.

 

[Barbara Fan]

I loved the Office UK and Ricky Gervais version but didnt like the US version

(But not a huge fan of US comedies anyway - the canned laughter has me reaching for the volume switch)

Loved UKs Broadchurch esp S1 - but Gracepoint didnt do it for me despite David Tennant starring

Im the opposite @Angels Chanting - I loved Ian Richardsons House of Cards, everyone at work recommended Kevin Spacey and I bought the box set cheap in HMV about 5 years ago, dont think I got past the first 6 episodes!

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Brighton Belles was an awful UK remark of the sublime Golden Girls.

Yes. It seems so wasteful as well because it had a terrific cast, but it was like trying to reinvent the wheel, and it was a little painful to watch good actresses doing what was essentially sitcom karaoke. It all felt empty and soulless.

I really do wonder what Carlton were thinking because not only was the original wonderful, it was also already well-known and beloved in the UK. It might have been shown on Channel 4 which generally had lower viewing figures, but it was also one of that channel's most-watched shows.


On the other hand, I'd say The Upper Hand - the British remake of Who's The Boss? - was far better received because not only was the original less well-known to Brits (I remember it airing on a Sunday teatime) it wasn't that great to begin with. Certainly not the phenomenon that The Golden Girls had been. I'd watched and enjoyed Who's The Boss?, for years before TUH came along, but I felt the remake surpassed it.

I think often it's the version which one watches first that becomes the favourite, so The Upper Hand is a rare exception. Probably similar to House Of Cards for you.

(But not a huge fan of US comedies anyway - the canned laughter has me reaching for the volume switch)

Earlier today I attempted to watch the Pilot of the US version of Ghosts after watching the last episode of the British original a few days ago.

Neither version has canned or studio laughter, but one thing that jumped out at me was that the American version felt far more like a generic sitcom than the original. The British version already had characters who were quirky, exaggerated and stereotypical (deliberately so), but balanced it with earthier characters (mostly the "living" ones as opposed to the ghosts) who gave it a kind of grounding.

In the remake, the lead actress -whose character provides the key grounding in the original version - delivers all her dialogue in a shrill sing-song voice, eyes wide and a sunny smile fixed almost permanently on her face. I persevered until the end of the episode, but I found myself shaking my head wondering why there couldn't be just one "real" character.

I've just begun watching Till Death Us Do Part, and was intrigued to see that the American adaption, All In The Family, was hugely popular and spawned several sequels (some of which are on my viewing bucket list). This list of differences between the two suggests that the original was toned down significantly when adapting. I haven't dismissed the idea of watching at least a little of the remake since it seems to be held in good regard, but I do suspect it may lack the original's bite.

 

[Willie Oleson]

I loved Ian Richardsons House of Cards, everyone at work recommended Kevin Spacey and I bought the box set cheap in HMV about 5 years ago, dont think I got past the first 6 episodes!

I also couldn't finish the first season of the US remake but to me it didn't have anything to do with being a "bad" remake.
It's just that I had already seen quite a few American outrageous political dramas and therefore it didn't offer me anything new and exciting.
There needs to be, at least, a pretence of dignity and tradition in order to make that biting satire work.

Also, I think there is something naturally cheeky and flashy about Kevin Spacey which kinda oversells the character of Frank Underwood.
Ian Richardson's Francis Urquhart looks like a boring old politician which juxtaposes his villainy in a very delightful way. Come to think of it, there was a similar character in THE COLBYS.

 

[Monzo]

“Kommissar Rex” was an Austrian-German series that was canceled after ten seasons due to declining ratings in Germany. Italy, where the series was still successful, took over production, so a total of 18 seasons were produced. Adaptations of "Kommissar Rex" have been produced in countries such as Russia, Slovakia and Canada, where the remake “Hudson & Rex” is still on air.

 

[Angela Channing]

I've just started watching The Couple Next Door which was on Channel 4 in the UK just before Christmas. It is a UK remake of a Dutch series called Nieuwe Buren (New Neighbours). I'm only one episode in and it's pretty good so far but I've not seen the original Dutch version so I can't compare.

 

[pete lashmar]

Queer as Folk in the UK was a huge hit, but when I watched it I just wasn't that impressed, but then I watched the U.S version and absolutely fell in love with all the characters.

In the UK the show had 8 episodes and a 2 part second series finale, I liked some of the characters but really disliked many too, which spoilt my enjoyment of the show.

In the U.S remake 5 series (83) episodes were made and I just loved the whole thing - every main character just sang for me and, because of it's length you followed their lives with far more interest.

After watching the US version I went back and watched the original UK series and still didn't like it.

As for the 2022 US remake....NOooooooo.....AWFUL series, absolutely loathed it.

 

[AndyB2008]

The American version of Cracker paled in comparison to the UK original.

One wonders if there was interference by ABC in the show too. R Lee Ermey's character Lt Fry was going to be written out in a similar situation to his UK counterpart Christopher Eccleston (and being the known actor, probably expensive hence being on short term) but ABC put their foot down and Lt Fry survived, exiting by being offered a new position in the LAPD.

(The writers made the version of Panhaligon, Hannah Tyler, their new Bilborough instead, and changed the Albie character to a woman).

The US version of Touching Evil saved the Mark Rivers character, whereas he was killed off in the UK original.

 

[Toni]

I was a pre-teenager when I watched the original UK "Man About the House" but couldn´t go beyond the first episode of its remake "Three´s Company". Maybe everything was too much like the original, including dialogues and situations, and even two of the actors looked like the original ones. Also, I think Yootha Joyce and Brian Murphy (the Ropers) were just geniuses, though the spin-off wasn´t up to their talents.

Spain also remade "The Golden Girls" and twice. The casts were great in both cases but the whole thing looked charmless and contrived. They also filmed a show that looked suspiciously like "Married...with Children" that seemed to gather big audiences and was very well cast. I really can´t appreciate Spanish comedies: everybody is constantly screaming and swearing. Which upsets Miss Piggy, the poor thing.

About the QAF´s, I only watched the first hour of the UK version, but got immediately hooked on the US version, partly because of the amazing Sharon Glass. Now I´m rewatching it by first time since then, and confirming how groundbreaking it was. I wish they didn´t do garbage subplots for certain supporting characters...

I´ve seen others directly as remakes, "The Killing" and "House of Cards" (minus the last season) being the best among them.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

A new video comparing six American sitcoms with the British series on which they're based:

It appears to be compiled and narrated by an American* with both a good knowledge of US sitcoms and an understanding of the difference in styles between countries, so it offers a balanced and insightful analysis about their appeal (or lack thereof).


* I did wonder at a couple of points if the narration is actually done by AI. It's so hard to tell these days.

 

[Emelee]

Yes. It seems so wasteful as well because it had a terrific cast, but it was like trying to reinvent the wheel, and it was a little painful to watch good actresses doing what was essentially sitcom karaoke. It all felt empty and soulless.

I really do wonder what Carlton were thinking because not only was the original wonderful, it was also already well-known and beloved in the UK. It might have been shown on Channel 4 which generally had lower viewing figures, but it was also one of that channel's most-watched shows.


On the other hand, I'd say The Upper Hand - the British remake of Who's The Boss? - was far better received because not only was the original less well-known to Brits (I remember it airing on a Sunday teatime) it wasn't that great to begin with. Certainly not the phenomenon that The Golden Girls had been. I'd watched and enjoyed Who's The Boss?, for years before TUH came along, but I felt the remake surpassed it.

I think often it's the version which one watches first that becomes the favourite, so The Upper Hand is a rare exception. Probably similar to House Of Cards for you.







Earlier today I attempted to watch the Pilot of the US version of Ghosts after watching the last episode of the British original a few days ago.

Neither version has canned or studio laughter, but one thing that jumped out at me was that the American version felt far more like a generic sitcom than the original. The British version already had characters who were quirky, exaggerated and stereotypical (deliberately so), but balanced it with earthier characters (mostly the "living" ones as opposed to the ghosts) who gave it a kind of grounding.

In the remake, the lead actress -whose character provides the key grounding in the original version - delivers all her dialogue in a shrill sing-song voice, eyes wide and a sunny smile fixed almost permanently on her face. I persevered until the end of the episode, but I found myself shaking my head wondering why there couldn't be just one "real" character.

Aahh, good. I was adding Ghosts to my to-watch list and wondered if I should choose the UK or US version. My gut feeling said UK version for a couple of reasons. I am now convinced it was the correct choice.

 

[Daniel Avery]

I've always heard about the Brighton Belles train-wreck but never thought to ask those who saw it: did they shoot the old Golden Girls scripts (with Brit revisions), or was it just similar characters with original scripts/situations? I ask because I watched a documentary about an attempt to adapt Married With Children for Russian TV (seriously!) and most of the issues came from their problems adapting the scripts to fit the experiences of Russians. If BB was shooting essentially the same scripts with a few British-isms dropped in, I can see why it would flop. By the time they "revised" all the MWC scripts, the show no longer made sense!

Forgive me if I've posted this one before, but this supercut of international adaptations of The Nanny features the different versions of the iconic opening titles. From the look of things, that sitcom appealed all over the world!

 

[Mel O'Drama]

My gut feeling said UK version for a couple of reasons. I am now convinced it was the correct choice.

Oh, excellent. I hope you'll let us know how you enjoy it.

did they shoot the old Golden Girls scripts (with Brit revisions), or was it just similar characters with original scripts/situations? I ask because I watched a documentary about an attempt to adapt Married With Children for Russian TV (seriously!) and most of the issues came from their problems adapting the scripts to fit the experiences of Russians. If BB was shooting essentially the same scripts with a few British-isms dropped in, I can see why it would flop.

It was recycled GG scripts with an occasional tweak to a word or line that better fitted the setting. If you're interested, I found this list of episode titles, most of which I'm sure you'll recognise from the original series. The only one I can't place is Love In A Sea Mist.

I think another significant reason The Brighton Belles didn't work was the popularity of the original series in Britain. It was one of the best-known and most popular American sitcoms airing here and episodes were regularly repeated so I'd have thought most of the series' target audience would have been at least aware of the original.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

This isn't about remakes per se, but about the different styles between British and American sitcoms (I thought there was a thread specifically about this subject but can't find it). Anyway, it's a nicely thought-out little piece from someone with broad experience of both cultures. There is some crossover with an explanation of the reasons international adaptions must change or die:

 

[Toni]

A funny anecdote about the Catalan dubbing of "Fawlty Towers" (one of many British shows that the channel who "rescued" "Dallas" programmed). Since back then, in Catalonia almost everybody understood (or spoke) both Catalan and Castillian Spanish, the misunderstanding between waiter Manuel and his bosses came across as just stupid. So the director and translator decided to make Manuel (who was played by a German actor, if I remember well) a Mexican instead of a Spanish "from Barcelona".

The result was that Manuel didn´t understand Catalan and the bosses kept talking to him in Catalan (interspersed with Spanish words), which was surreal. Of course, in real life Catalans and Mexicans can understand each other because, either Catalans start speaking Spanish, or Mexicans learned to speak Catalan (very few, to be honest).

 

[James from London]

the different styles between British and American sitcoms

Very interesting video. I'm reminded of Simon Pegg's observation that, traditionally speaking, British sitcoms tend to be about characters you laugh at -- often people with delusions of grandeur/social pretentions who continually set themselves for a fall (yer David Brents and Basil Fawltys, Rigsbys and George Ropers, Margots and Hyacinths)*, while American ones are full of people you laugh with -- the wisecracking barflies in Cheers, the wisecracking friends in Friends, etc.

*The one exception he offered was Fletch in Porridge, who was much wittier and more self-aware than your average UK sitcom lead, although there are probably plenty of others on both sides.

You can see how the difference is reflected in the writing styles. The US sitcoms require a team of writers to come up with a nonstop barrage of surefire gags to put in the characters' mouths, while the more author-led UK series will be more focused on the specific foibles and eccentricities of its main players, and how their subsequent behaviour eventually leads to them sliding down a hill in a bathtub or whatever.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Very interesting video. I'm reminded of Simon Pegg's observation that, traditionally speaking, British sitcoms tend to be about characters you laugh at -- often people with delusions of grandeur/social pretentions who continually set themselves for a fall

Do you think this has something to do with a taste for self-mockery? Sure, many of those characters are exaggerated for full comical effect but often in an embarrassing way, and everybody knows what that feels like.
To compare, the ROSEANNE characters could have been very much like that except that they always had the upper hand and were never defeated by their own sitcom.
They were more entertaining versions of people that you might know.

 

[James from London]

Do you think this has something to do with a taste for self-mockery? Sure, many of those characters are exaggerated for full comical effect but often in an embarrassing way, and everybody knows what that feels like.
To compare, the ROSEANNE characters could have been very much like that except that they always had the upper hand and were never defeated by their own sitcom.

I think that's sort of what the woman in the video was saying, that the US sitcoms are more of an aspirational fantasy. The obvious example being that everyone in Friends has perfect teeth and hair and lives in a huge apartment no real life twenty-something could afford, but yes, even in a blue collar show like Roseanne, everyone's funnier and smarter and quicker than we are at home. In the UK sitcoms, it goes the other way, with our everyday flaws taken to a comedic extreme. Same with soaps: in the US, everyone's rich and glamorous and melodramatic; in the UK, (almost) everyone's living hand to mouth while knee-deep in "issues".