Crumpets and Burgers

The US love to make things their own and the popularity of UK TV has sparked their interest for many years, so much so that there have been many adaptations of UK shows to the US. The UK has adapted some too, but the US is becoming notorious for it. Shows like ‘The Office’, ‘Miranda’ (which was renamed, ‘Call Me Kat’), ‘Ghosts’ and ‘Shameless’ have been adapted for US audiences to various degrees of success. An American ‘Peep Show’ adaptation has been attempted 4 times to no avail, and yet, a fifth one is on its way.  UK comedy shows are very valuable here, so I can understand why the US wants to take it. But if they want to adapt a comedy from UK to the US, they have to ask if it is an exact blueprint to follow, or inspiration to spring from. Because they have misstepped before, and for a few reasons.

Firstly, the UK and US show structure is completely different. Maybe you’ve noticed that UK shows don’t have a lot of episodes, typically having around 6 per season. This is because the UK doesn’t have to rely on airtime for advertising like the US does. When the US adapts a 6 episode, 3 season show into a 6 season show with 22 episodes each, it may be stretching the show into a format that it was not made for. Did you know that ‘The Inbetweeners’ only has 18 episodes? And yet, the show was successful and even has 2 movies to show for it. The US made their own version of the show. No, I’m not joking. You can watch episode 1 here. It was cancelled after 12 episodes.

UK humour is very different to the US and ‘The Inbetweeners’ UK is quintessentially British. It leans into its vulgarity and idioms specifically for the UK space. People could relate to the boys’ experience (not me though, I was a model student x) and they remember joking like that with their school friends. The acting is so specific for each character and the jokes would be difficult to transfer overseas with new accents and new environments without jeopardising the essence of the show, which is raunchy teenage Britain. The US was usually used to gross-out, rude comedy in movies like ‘American Pie’, while their TV show teenagers were living glossy, dramatic lives and not making comedy out of saying ‘ohh, friend’. The American version tries to use their equivalent of crass comedy but it doesn’t really take. They even bleeped the swear words of the show, which takes away a large portion of ‘The Inbetweeners’ comedic timing. When you take that away, you can be left with something a bit shallow, especially when you are not compensating for that loss with anything else. For the successful show ‘Veep’ is a US adaptation of the UK sitcom ‘The Thick Of It’. The UK show creator thought that the first attempt at the American adaptation “was terrible…they took the idea and chucked out all the style. It was all conventionally shot and there was no improvisation or swearing”. Sitcom adaptations are usually done because others find the show funny, so the comedic tools and style have to stay to keep the show roots. But, when you have the roots, you need to change other things to cater to the context of a new audience with a distinct humour. ‘Veep’ changed the characters to fit the American environment but ‘The Inbetweeners’ didn’t. The US adaptation uses the same names and storylines as the UK one and this rarely works, especially when a show has such a unique blend of cast and writing that is hard to replicate.

It is hard to know how well to stick with the original format. Is it an ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’ vibe or not? In this case, break it and fix it. There is no point adapting shows but then doing the exact same thing as the original – because why not just watch the original? You can see this with ‘The IT Crowd’ adaptation. The US version replicated the original show word for word, shot for shot. They also got Richard Ayoade to reprise his role as ‘Moss’, but it still did not work, because a shot for shot remake does not mean an instant success. Here’s a video that talks more about why that version didn’t work if you want to know more. 

Changing things can really be the difference between the make or break of a show. You can see this with ‘The Office’. The UK version was successful, and the protagonist, David Brent, was a pessimistic and misogynistic boss, the kind of dry and sarcastic humour that worked with the British public. The US version replicated this in its first season, and they were close to getting cancelled because of it. However, it ran for 9 seasons and is one of the best adaptations ever, partly because of Steve Carell’s portrayal of Michael Scott – the US equivalent to David Brent – who was changed to be more loving and hopeful to fit the American audience in season 2. Through this, the show and the characters were able to come into their own and be standalone while getting inspiration from the original. Greg Daniels, the creator of the US one, also said that he didn’t want to add cultural references to the show, to make it timeless. And that’s what the show is. It also helps that the setting is an office, something easily transferrable to other countries. Not everything has to be adapted, but I will let this one slide because I like it x

I am not against an adaptation, but a show must step into its own light and embrace its context appropriately, paying homage to the original without being a complete remake. How does one practically execute this? I’m not entirely sure, ask the head of Hollywood I guess.