If we like American TV programmes so much...

Ally McBeal. Friends. Frasier. Sex and the City. 24. The West Wing. Will and Grace (maybe not).

Successful, wealthy, intelligent, unlucky in love, city-living, long-running, popular.

Eastenders, Coronation Street, Emmerdale, er... erm...

Unsuccessful, poor, unintelligent, married, non-metropolitan lifestyles, long-running, popular.

Why do we enjoy watching poor, stupid people, whilst the Americans like rich and successful ones?

Because we have a sense of irony? You have to remember popular comedies in Britain, such as the Office, have fallen by the wayside in America... and personally I don't tend to watch American TV shows that much. But yes, an interesting observation

Err - the US version of the Office hasn't been broadcast yet has it?? And the original won an Emmy or a Golden Globe didn't it?

Ally McBeal - never seen
Friends - seen, rubbish
Frasier - never seen
Sex and the City - never seen
24 - seen, excellent, but not really about rich successful people
The West Wing - never seen
Will and Grace - never seen

Eastenders - seen, OK
Coronation Street - seen, but never watched, not my thing
Emmerdale - never seen

Unsuccessful - depends on your definition of success!
Poor - so what
Unintelligent - what, compared to some of those on US programmes!!!?
Married - from what I've seen there's a mix on all programmes
Non-metropolitan lifestyles - aren't Eastenders &Corry based in cities?

Answer to your question - most Brits are middle classed and reasonably intelligent, so like watching poor stupid people to feel superior to them. It underlines our class system.

Most Americans are working class and seem to be of lower intellect (though of course that's a bit of a sweeping statement, but as most can't point to their country on a map of the world I'm sticking to it!) and like aspiring to greater things. It underlines their capitalist system.

Really? Would love to see evidence to accurately substantiate that.

And as far as I know, there are about 52% C2DEs in the UK, 48% ABC1s. So most people in the UK are not "middle class".

My point originally was going to be that American programmes like Frasier, Ally McBeal, Friends, Sex and the City all gain cult status over here - when they end, they make news headlines, they are successful in this market as well as the American one... and yet no UK broadcaster has ever sought to produce something similar.

We go on producing crappy, cheapo alternatives, that never gain the iconic status of their American equivalents. American versions are quite distinct: they have a very small group of characters/one character who the story revolves around, and their personalities/personality are/is very developed. They live in major cities, they hold down very identifiable jobs - lawyer, psychiatrist, president, journalist - and they are very easy to attach to. British versions just can't quite manage that.

I agree that we've produced some serious class - the likes of the Office and Little Britain. But they are a different genre altogether.

I'm just wondering why.

No.

They are based in the inner city. Impoverished and dirty folk, who live in terraced houses and not apartments.

It might be more real, and i'm not saying necessarily there is anything wrong with that. I'm just really wondering to myself - and everyone else reading - why it is that, having seen the massive, massive, massive success of these US TV programmes, no British broadcaster has ever been able to successfully replicate what they have done.

We go on producing crappy TV versions of Henry James and Jane Austin stuff, or two-series-long crap about people in menial jobs.

Look at Cutting It, for instance - nothing wrong with it, very good programme - but hairdressers... why? Who really aspires to be a hairdresser? On the pay scale, it's low down. We make programmes about people with fairly unsuccessful careers, and the Americans don't.

I forgot Seinfeld.

...and they're all terrible! (Apart from 24 and ER - seems like two characters as the max)

First of all let me apologise for posting three things in a row... but...

Isn't the Office a perfect example of how the sort of programmes we make are, if you like, incompatible with the way the US does things?

The US tried to turn the Office into a typical US show -- it was going to be set in New York, with a good looking chap, and a tower block as its home. The British version was set in a trading estate in Slough. NBC totally missed the point of the programme.

They like our programmes as much as we like theirs, but whenever one tries to copy the other they make a right mess of it.

Oh yes, answering with stereotypes is sooo intelligent, Moz.



Partly true.
I think the British as a whole have a much more mixed view of ambition, success and wealth than the Americans. We don't really have a version of the 'American Dream', which many, if not most, Americans aspire to. We, on the other hand, are always a bit suspicious of those who in some way rise above the crowd.
They have something similar in Australia, which they refer to as the 'Tall Poppy Syndrome'.

What about "This Life"?

You say I shouldn't use a stereotype and then accept another one.

Of course not all Americans are stupid, but any country which elected George W Bush has to have some serious questions asked about it!

I can't say that Americans are stupid, but I can say that on the whole they appear to be very ignorant - especially of anything which goes on beyond their shores. The way they say 'Paris, France' is typical. There's not need to say Paris is in France, it's obvious!

Well, I did say 'partly true', but I will gracefully accept your point.


On the one hand, yes. How could they elect some a strikingly unintelligent leader.
On the other hand, his election was partly due to a failing of the American electoral system.


I've always assumed this is less to do with stupidity and more to do with arrogance (or at least self-centredness). There are a lot of places in the US with names the same as towns and cities in the UK and the rest of Europe and I think they would assume that without the country added, the speaker was talking about a place in the US.