BetterMost, Wyoming & Brokeback Mountain Forum
The World Beyond BetterMost => Anything Goes => Topic started by: Shuggy on December 13, 2006, 06:09:05 am
-
I've just seen the 1973 version of The Wicker Man (great movie!) and heard how universally panned the 2006 remake was.
Then on comes the US version of The Office which is cringe-making in quite a different way from the UK version.
Then there was Queer as Folk and Lord of the Flies.
In each case the US media saw something was quintessentially British, and remade it in their own image, ripping out everything that made it what it was. Why do they do that? It's as though they think US audiences can't bear to see anything that isn't Amurrican. But can't they?
-
Films - I'm not so sure why (but there has been a long lead time between the films - they remake US films too)
but as for the likes of sitcoms and dramas - well its got to be interesting to the audiences I guess. The typical office in the US is probably a different place to the UK. hence the Office UK wouldn't appeal to mainstream US in the same way it did here.
Others I can think of are:
Little Britain - Vicky Pollard is hilariious here but won't have as much impact in the states - they don't have Chavs/Neds. Although I'm sure the only gay in the village sketch's would go down well with a lot of the people here. So funny!!
Katherine Tate Show - yes? or am I making that up?
Coupling - not sure if it did well though?
Is Extras in the US the UK version?
The UK Queer as Folk I loved. certainly very sensational at the time. First time rimming on ordinary TV for one- graphic gay sex scenes were new too. But it was intended to be a short drama rather than a sitcom - did the US one not go on for seasons and seasons?
-
Little Britain - Vicky Pollard is hilariious here but won't have as much impact in the states - they don't have Chavs/Neds. Although I'm sure the only gay in the village sketch's would go down well with a lot of the people here. So funny!!
Katherine Tate Show - yes? or am I making that up?
Oh how VERY dare you! ;) Both would be a disaster as a US remake.... :laugh:
-
honest to go Little Britain is being made into a US version - not sure about Catherine Tate Show though but then again Am I bovvaad? hee hee!!
IS Kath & Kim shown in the USA? Love that too.
-
honest to go Little Britain is being made into a US version - not sure about Catherine Tate Show though but then again Am I bovvaad? hee hee!!
Face Bovvaaaaaad? ;D
I have no clue why they are doing a remake of Little Britain... Why would you do that? Didn't they do the same with Absolutely Fabulous, that was a disaster, if I recall correctly...
-
Why? Why not I guess.
Here in the States we had a TV situation comedy called "All in the Family". I believe it was based on a British TV show called "Till death do us part". Our version here was so popular it ran for 11 years.
I never saw the UK version of Queer as Folk. I did like the US version.
As for Film remakes? I'm not sure if they make them because they have run out of ideas, or they legitimately liked the original and wanted to make a modern version.
There are alot of younger people who just will not sit down and watch a black and white classic movie. What a shame yes?
Take King Kong for example. The original was made in 1939 I believe. It is considered a classic. Virtually everyone over the age of 40 has seen it on TV at some point in their life. In 1976 they remade King Kong. I was 10 years old and went to see it. I loved it! Even today I think it is good remake despite its special effects are not as good as todays stuff. Fastforward to 2006. King Kong is remade once again. Special effects are much better, but I felt the casting was all wrong. The acting suffered. It is abad remake in my opinion.
Maybe the James Bond series is doing this too. I loved the early 1960s classic Bond movies. But do todays 18+ crowd see them the same way? Back in the 1962 Dr.No film the men all still wear hats! Women and Black people are stereotyped. Maybe todays generation just don't identify with the movies of past eras?
Another case: The 1974 US movie "Heaven Can Wait" starring Warren Beaty. I loved this movie. It was remade a few years ago starring Chris Rock. Ugh, some parts are so painful I can't watch it.
-
Why? Why not I guess.
Here in the States we had a TV situation comedy called "All in the Family". I believe it was based on a British TV show called "Till death do us part". Our version here was so popular it ran for 11 years.
Oh I can understand why they do US remakes of sitcoms, but Little Britain is so typically British and it's a sketch show, not a sitcom.
-
A friend loaned me the DVD of Little Britain to watch. I really didn't care for it. Yes, there were a few funny parts, but overall I didn't like it. Especially the only gay guy in the village skits. Maybe because I am not a Fem like that. I just hate seeing bad stereotypes.
I did like the old Benny Hill TV shows. Course those haven't been shown here in the States for 20 years! I do like British humour. I enjoy "Are you being served" reruns and "Keeping up Appearances" for example.
I was quite surprized last May when I was in London. I turned on the Teli and all the shows were from the States! LOL. Go figure.
-
See I'm not a follower of Little Britain - but Matt Lucas does crack me up.
The only gay in the village to me is just so silly - and thats the whole point of it. He's taking the stereotype so far that its idiotic. Bit like the whole Borat thing.
As far as I'm aware Matt Lucas is not as all fem/queeny in real life. (And his TV producer boyfriend Kevin McGee is a bit of a hunk!)
-
The only gay in the village to me is just so silly - and thats the whole point of it. He's taking the stereotype so far that its idiotic.
I totally agree!
-
David: "It's Boo-KAY!" ;D
"Coupling" was an absolute bomb in its U.S. remake.
Never saw either British or U.S. versions of "Queer as Folk." For one thing, I won't pay for anything other than basic cable service--there's quite enough to watch on that alone, thank you very much. For another, from what I read of the show, the premise and characters seemed so removed from my own life as a gay man that it genuinely didn't interest me. And I don't feel obligated to support a show just because it's "gay."
This week's--Dec. 11--issue of The New Yorker actually has a very thoughtful commentary on the British vs. American versions of "The Office," the strengths and weaknesses of both, why some aspects of the British version just wouldn't "play" in the U.S. I'm sorry I can't provide a link--maybe someone who's more cyber-savvy than I am can do that. I've never seen the British version and I'm not particularly a fan of the American version, either--it's just what's "on" to fill the dead airspace in the half an hour after "My Name is Earl" before I change the channel to "C.S.I." ;D
-
Sure thing Mrs. Bucket LOL
Jeff, I can't watch the "Office" because I find the guy in it so annoying. Steve Carrel? Acting or not, he strikes me as a real jerk. I don't waste my time watching shows with annoying characters.
Now CSI however.... I love that show. The Vegas one that is. All the characters are likeable. Although Sarah gets on my nerves sometimes. I hate the fact she and Gil are now involved.
Now if we could just get them to write a plot where our two favorite CSI boys get drunk and wake up naked in bed together......
-
Now CSI however.... I love that show. The Vegas one that is. All the characters are likeable. Although Sarah gets on my nerves sometimes. I hate the fact she and Gil are now involved.
:o Aaaaah SPOILER....!!! I didn't know that yet! We're a bit behind her in Holland...
-
:o Aaaaah SPOILER....!!! I didn't know that yet! We're a bit behind her in Holland...
MEEP! Oops! Sorry bout that! I didn't know y'all were a season behind us.
At least I think they are together. They don't really go there. I've just picked up subtle things said between them. So I suppose I could be wrong. You'll have to decide when you catch up.
-
This week's--Dec. 11--issue of The New Yorker actually has a very thoughtful commentary on the British vs. American versions of "The Office," the strengths and weaknesses of both, why some aspects of the British version just wouldn't "play" in the U.S. I'm sorry I can't provide a link--maybe someone who's more cyber-savvy than I am can do that. I've never seen the British version and I'm not particularly a fan of the American version, either--it's just what's "on" to fill the dead airspace in the half an hour after "My Name is Earl" before I change the channel to "C.S.I." ;D
I LOVE "The Office." It's probably my favorite TV show. So original! So hilarious! So cringe-inducing!
And it's a perfect complement to "My Name is Earl," which is probably my second-favorite show -- both are really funny in completely different ways. And now that the lineup also includes "30 Rock," which can be kind of funny, and "Scrubs," which I've never been a big fan of but is sometimes good, it's worth watching TV on Thursday nights.
I read that New Yorker piece last night. I looked for it just now on the New Yorker site, but the site already has next week's articles up (they change every week). Anyway, what it said was that in the first season the American version simply remade the same episodes as the British version. But the British one was only 12 episodes long, so the Americans eventually had to try new things, and at that point, according to the New Yorker writer, it got much better. I guess American office culture is enough different from British office culture that it worked better for an American audience with a different tone and different types of characters. For example, according to the article, the boss in the British version was very class-conscious, whereas the American boss is not -- because Americans generally don't acknowledge the existence of class (ha ha).
Apparently there are Canadian, French and German versions of "The Office" now, too.
Here is a Slate story on the subject:
http://www.slate.com/id/2135824/ (http://www.slate.com/id/2135824/)
-
***SPOILER (kind of) for The Vanishing in this post***
I often wondered about this, too. But in the end, the taste of Americans is perhaps really different from the European ones.
As much as I like many American movies, I can't remember one single American remake I would prefer to the European original. For example:
- L'Emmerdeur French movie from 1973 with Lino Ventura and Jaques Brel -great, hilarious.
It's US remake Buddy, Buddy with Lemmon/Matthau - lukewarm
- Three Men and a Baby - liked it, but the French original is much more charming.
- Spoorloos (Dutch thriller from 1988) and it's remake The Vanishing (1993). Both directed by George Sluizer. OMG, very bad example of a remake. This one is totally muddled and ruined in the US version. They changed the ending!
Imagine Ang Lee doing a BBM remake in Taiwan (or wherever); and when Junior visits Ennis at the end of the movie, Jack would sit in the passenger's seat of her car. Boo, all was a big fakery. Unimaginable.
- British TV series Cracker: I loved, loved, loved the British version and Robbie Coltrane's Fitz. He is a man with rough edges and has his flaws. But in the US version, his character is much more smoothed. I saw only one and a half episode from the US version. Couldn't stand it.
So when I prefer the European version, why shouldn't the Americans prefer the American version? And if they do, the remaking has its reasons/justification.
BTW: please don't ask me why the Germans (and Spanish) dub movies. I'm sure the Skandinavians think we're nuts for it.
Well, I sure have an explanation for it: the majority of the audience is simply lazy and not used to subtitles. Maybe it's the same with the American practise of doing special US versions of movies.
-
please don't ask me why the Germans (and Spanish) dub movies. I'm sure the Skandinavians think we're nuts for it.
Well, I sure have an explanation for it: the majority of the audience is simply lazy and not used to subtitles. Maybe it's the same with the American practise of doing special US versions of movies.
I think you're on to something; - that both dubbing and re-makes come from movie- and TV-companies wanting to create comfort in the form of familiarity for their audiences. To remove barriers in the form of "strange" foreign cultural traits or ditto customs or foreign languages; - barriers that might make the audiences concentrate too much on the stuff they're unaccustomed to - or might make them averse to even watching.
I've always (rather pragmatically) figured that Germany, Spain and France dub everything because their viewer base is sufficiently large to make it worthwhile economically to create that familiar language comfort zone - while the small Scandinavian countries probably started using subtitling from the get-go because the cost of dubbing would be too large as compared to the limited number of viewers. (In fact, cartoons and the most popular animated features that draw a large and mostly very young audience are in fact dubbed in Norway as well; - since some of the audience can't read). I'm very glad that we do get the original films with subtitles here, because I surely think dubbing takes away from a film. Losing the original voices takes away so much! Though I've watched some dubbed-to-German American TV shows and films on RTL and PRO7 and I must say the dubbing was very good.
Subtitling is not ideal either, because it's so difficult to not read them, even when you understand the original language. And those subtitles do pull attention away from the actual scenes.
-------
Out of curiousity, and from the vantage point of being neither American nor British I can easily see why "Queer as folk" got remade, I think...... I've only seen the UK version and I somehow can't imagine US general audiences managing to cope blithely with that degree of explicitness at all. Maybe that's just me confusing the US general audience with the AMPAS. ::) Was the US version watered down in that regard, or just as explicit?
-
Out of curiousity, and from the vantage point of being neither American nor British I can easily see why "Queer as folk" got remade, I think...... I've only seen the UK version and I somehow can't imagine US general audiences managing to cope blithely with that degree of explicitness at all. Maybe that's just me confusing the US general audience with the AMPAS. ::) Was the US version watered down in that regard, or just as explicit?
I can't comment on the explicitness since, as I've said, I've never watched the show. But I neglected to add earlier I've been sort of surprised that the name of the show "made it through immigration," since "Queer as folk" strikes me as a particularly British expression (what the heck does it mean, anyway? ;D ). Anyway, it's not a form of expression that you typically hear in Pennsylvania.
-
Kelda and Melissa...
Please don't give up on us Americans, okay?? British programs are being watched more and more over here in the US thanks to stations such as PBS and BBC America. As you know, British comedy is very different from American comedy. Many Americans just don't "get it" at first. Many British sitcoms are now becoming very popular here in the US, and Americans are beginning to appreciate British comedy and humor (humour).
I don't know why we take wonderful British shows such as "Queer as Folk", "Men Behaving Badly", "Steptoe and Son" (just to name a few) and totally destroy them. It's an awful damn shame. "Queer as Folk" might be an exception. I didn't really care for it, but obviously many other people do. "Men Behaving Badly", a brilliant British comedy was remade for US audiences back in the 1990's and the story took place in Indianapolis. It was terrible and didn't even last one full season before getting axed.
Of course we do the same thing with game shows. "The Weakest Link" aired in Britain YEARS before Americans ever heard of it. Many of these reality shows we love here in the US originated in Britain.
As far as the movies, I have NO idea why the US does all these remakes. Again, it's a damn shame most of the time. I think I agree with David. Often times I think they have simply run out of ideas. ::)
-
I can't comment on the explicitness since, as I've said, I've never watched the show. But I neglected to add earlier I've been sort of surprised that the name of the show "made it through immigration," since "Queer as folk" strikes me as a particularly British expression (what the heck does it mean, anyway? ;D ). Anyway, it's not a form of expression that you typically hear in Pennsylvania.
Maybe here in the US they meant to call it "Queer Ass Folk" and they left off one "s".
Do you think?
The homophobes would have loved it, that's for sure.
Well, maybe not. That show confuses me. ???
-
I don't know why we take wonderful British shows such as "Queer as Folk", "Men Behaving Badly", "Steptoe and Son" (just to name a few) and totally destroy them. It's an awful damn shame. "Queer as Folk" might be an exception. I didn't really care for it, but obviously many other people do. "Men Behaving Badly", a brilliant British comedy was remade for US audiences back in the 1990's and the story took place in Indianapolis. It was terrible and didn't even last one full season before getting axed.
David, reading your comment stirred a memory--and this is not meant to give you an argument--but wasn't "All In the Family" adapted from a British original, too?
I suddenly find myself wondering, too, whether "British comedy" covers a wider range than U.S. comedy. I can only think of myself as an example. I hated Benny Hill, and Monty Python has always left me cold. I like "Keeping Up Appearances" and "Are You Being Served," and I love "As Time Goes By." All British comedies, but all very different. Is there as great a diversity in U.S. comedy?
-
Out of curiousity, and from the vantage point of being neither American nor British I can easily see why "Queer as folk" got remade, I think...... I've only seen the UK version and I somehow can't imagine US general audiences managing to cope blithely with that degree of explicitness at all. Maybe that's just me confusing the US general audience with the AMPAS. ::) Was the US version watered down in that regard, or just as explicit?
actually, QAF was on Showtime, a permium cable channel, so it was able to get away with lots of explicitness. The UK version would have been fine. The US version is just as explicit. By the way, I always wondered if the US viewers understood where the title came from.
but it's not just tv shows from over the pond that got remade. Hollywood has been remaking material from the East as well. The Magnificent Seven, with Charles Bronson, Yul Brynner, and Steve McQueen is a remake of Japan's Seven Samurai. More recent films are The Ring, The Grudge. The Departed (a remake of what was called Infernal Affairs). If anyone remember Shall We Dance with JLo and Gere, you should catch the Japanese original by the same title. It's absolutely beautiful, and Hollywood completely butchered it. I think for the most part, remaking film is just Hollywood trying to cash in on ideas rather than giving artistic integrity any credit. Their argument that American public can't deal with foreign film or subtitles has also been proven false. The mainstream success of "Crouching Tiger" and "Beautiful Life" shows that American audience are willing to see film that come from outside their culture.
-
Kelda and Melissa...
Please don't give up on us Americans, okay??
oh god! I'm totally not giving up on you - some of my fave comedies are USA. As I said in my first post, you've got to get it right for the mainstream audience don't you? I'm sure there are american shows which have been adapted for here.
But The Catherine Tate Show and Little Britian are just soooooo British I just don't know how they are going to change it to appeal to the American Market. It'll be a totally different show - so why therefore base it on those shows?
Re: the background to 'queer as folk' - it comes from the expression 'there is nowt as queer as folk' which is a northern English phrase, which means "there's nothing as strange as some people", ie, whoever you were talking about just before is very strange.
Interesting that you all liked Keeping Up Appearances - did you ever see the actress playing Mrs Boo-kay - Patricia Routledge - in her other show? It was called Hetty Wainthrop Investigates. she was an OAP solving mysteries - and her side kick nt hat was a very young Dominic Monaghan. I love the theme tune for this - always wanted to oplay it as a solo in my band.
-
but it's not just tv shows from over the pond that got remade. Hollywood has been remaking material from the East as well. The Magnificent Seven, with Charles Bronson, Yul Brynner, and Steve McQueen is a remake of Japan's Seven Samurai.
Just goes to show, though, that you can't make a blanket statement that "all remakes are bad." All due respect to it's being a remake of Kurosawa's Seven Samurai, The Magnificent Seven is considered a classic Western in most people's books.
-
Just goes to show, though, that you can't make a blanket statement that "all remakes are bad." All due respect to it's being a remake of Kurosawa's Seven Samurai, The Magnificent Seven is considered a classic Western in most people's books.
I wasn't trying to make a blanket statement Jeff. Not at all. There are many great remakes in this country. I cited "Queer as Folk" as one example (I don't really care for it, but many people do). But there are some pretty bad remakes included in the mix too.
You mentioned "All in the Family". I remember watching this show when I was a child. I remember hearing a toilet flush for the first time on television while watching this show. (When I was young, they never even used the word "toilet" on television, much less show a toilet or hear it flush). I loved that show and I still watch the reruns on TVLand.
I'm sorry if I gave you the wrong impression Jeff.
-
I wasn't trying to make a blanket statement Jeff. Not at all. There are many great remakes in this country. I cited "Queer as Folk" as one example (I don't really care for it, but many people do). But there are some pretty bad remakes included in the mix too.
You mentioned "All in the Family". I remember watching this show when I was a child. I remember hearing a toilet flush for the first time on television while watching this show. (When I was young, they never even used the word "toilet" on television, much less show a toilet or hear it flush). I loved that show and I still watch the reruns on TVLand.
I'm sorry if I gave you the wrong impression Jeff.
Oh, by no means! I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I thought you were. My intent was just to say that I think it's unwise generally to condemn remakes, and The Magnificent Seven illustrates why it's unwise--it is considered a classic in and of itself, even though it's a remake of Kurosawa's Seven Samurai. Sorry for any misunderstanding!
You remember watching "All in the Family" as a child? OK, now I feel ... old. ... :-\ ;D :laugh:
-
Starboardlight, thanks very much for replying to my question. :)
-
Oh, by no means! I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I thought you were. My intent was just to say that I think it's unwise generally to condemn remakes, and The Magnificent Seven illustrates why it's unwise--it is considered a classic in and of itself, even though it's a remake of Kurosawa's Seven Samurai. Sorry for any misunderstanding!
You remember watching "All in the Family" as a child? OK, now I feel ... old. ... :-\ ;D :laugh:
you're right of course. not all remakes are bad. The recent The Departed is said to be pretty good. My problem is these remakes give very little credit to the originators. Magnificent Seven became a classic, while the Kurosawa's involvement is largely unacknowledge by the American public. There's something wrong about that to me.
-
you're right of course. not all remakes are bad. The recent The Departed is said to be pretty good. My problem is these remakes give very little credit to the originators. Magnificent Seven became a classic, while the Kurosawa's involvement is largely unacknowledge by the American public. There's something wrong about that to me.
I'm with Mikeala et al, who say it's not because of lack of ideas or imagination, but that the original movie/TV show concept was good but producers in the States think the comfort level would be better if the movie/TV show was Americanized. I think the saying is, 'Well, will it play in Des Moines?' If you can't imagine the dour Midwestern small town folk 1) able to understand the accents and 2) get the references, then perhaps that's their thinking as well. Movie/TV producers are trying for revenue and that means numbers. They are notorious for dumbing down and underestimating their audiences, but hey, 'The Simple Life' has been renewed for another season, so I think they come by their MO honestly.
I loved 'The Wicker Man' original as well, but it badly needed to be updated and we pagans were pretty up when we heard the news it was going to be remade, then promptly were immensely disappointed when we heard about all the changes and that the director was trying to appeal to a 'Christian' audience who didn't want a movie with a message that all religions have problems when people become fanatics.
David, as a child I very much enjoyed the reruns of America's "Steptoe and Son" aka "Sandford and Son". :-*
Isn't Bollywood famous for their remakes?
I agree with star, it is a shame that the original works and moviemakers go unremarked because the majority of the newer generation don't realize they ARE remakes, but of course, that's been a problem since day one. Even Kurosawa's movies I think were influenced by stories he read/heard in his own country, so I guess even his movies are 'rehashes' of original works.
-
Magnificent Seven became a classic, while the Kurosawa's involvement is largely unacknowledge by the American public. There's something wrong about that to me.
Agreed! (Jeff nods head vigorously.) Especially the part about the lack of acknowledgment by the American public.
-
"Queer as folk" strikes me as a particularly British expression (what the heck does it mean, anyway? ;D ).
There's a proverb, "There's owt so queer as folk," meaning "There's nothing as strange as people." You say it when someone's done something inexplicable, usually in a Yorkshire accent: "There's owt so kware as fawk*". In the UK the show's title is also a play on "queer as fuck" as in "homosexual as anything".
*I can't quite put the vowel into print, it's somewhere between the aw of walk, the o of folk and the oh of fog (but not your American fahg).
-
As far as I'm aware Matt Lucas is not as all fem/queeny in real life. (And his TV producer boyfriend Kevin McGee is a bit of a hunk!)
CONGRATULATIONS to Matt and Kevin who got married yesterday - and had a panto themed wedding reception!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6188161.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6188161.stm)
(http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42363000/jpg/_42363621_ceremony_220_pa.jpg)
(http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42363000/jpg/_42363631_lucas_party_pa_416.jpg)