The Mighty Boosh is rubbish, btw.
American TV vs UK TV
- Thread starter spanglechick
- Start date
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
It's about the fact the consumer - you - pay an awful lot more, relatively speaking, for the commercial channels than you do for the BBC.
Fwiw, I'm not a great fan of the BBC (esp. news and current affairs) but if you're relying on an economic argument, as you are, you have to recognise the reality, and the reality is you pay for commercial tv every time you go shopping, unless you believe the tens of thousands for every advert comes out of what would have been shareholder profits and the Board's bonus's.
It's just plain dumb to think you don't pay way over the top, relative to quality of content, for ITV. Just take look at their annual accounts.
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
And anudder thing . . .
I don't pay for ther BBC because I don't have a tv, but I do pay for ITV and C4 every trip I take to the shops. So please don't try and tell me the Licence Fee is a 'bad thing', it means that people who use the product pay for it, and not the rest of us.
I don't pay for ther BBC because I don't have a tv, but I do pay for ITV and C4 every trip I take to the shops. So please don't try and tell me the Licence Fee is a 'bad thing', it means that people who use the product pay for it, and not the rest of us.
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
I don't think its helping that american tv is draining Britain of its acting talent. I read somewhere the other day that a third of the new shows this year used a British actor/ress feigning an american accent. Its a bit of a fad.
Here's a not-at-all comprehensive list:
http://www.tvscoop.tv/2007/07/top_ten_brits_o.html
Can't blame the actors. I'm sure the money is better over here.
Here's a not-at-all comprehensive list:
http://www.tvscoop.tv/2007/07/top_ten_brits_o.html
Can't blame the actors. I'm sure the money is better over here.
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
editor
hiraethified
Who's making that claim then, Johnny?
editor
hiraethified
Doesn't exist in the UK, but we've got loads of alternatives (Sky boxes, PVRs, iPlayer etc etc),
Well... Current Affairs quizzes and shows don't translate well... When I've been living in the US, I've found that what they do have is quite enjoyable and fun, once you know what they're going on about and are surrounded by it.
Some UK tv is quite dire, so I like the situation now. Its quite possible to have the best of UK tv and the best of US tv while you're in the UK...
I think an interesting comparison is the BBC and HBO. HBO seem to produce regular very high quality shows, in part due to the fact that they don't have to bow down to corporate advertising interests (David Chase had The Sopranos turned down by many of the main networks before getting in at HBO). Now the BBC also have no adverts, but they seem less willing to take genuine risks and seem to want to compete for the populist vote with ITV, C4 and Sky. You do wonder whether the likes of Monty Python, The Day Today or HIGNFY would get commissioned as new programmes now.
clandestino
no llevar papel
krtek a houby
Saoirse don Phalaistín!
krtek a houby
Saoirse don Phalaistín!
And the beeb got a lot of grief from bothersome militant Christians. Think that's what happens when you take these genuine risks, sadly.
It is without any doubt. I remember at one point, Seinfeld was getting 130m a year. I reckon the most any UK domestic telly star must be 5m a year, maximum
What? during the film?
if they did that here i'd fucking walk out and go and ask for my money back.
editor
hiraethified
I'm about 'meh' about both those shows. I mean, they're funny alright, but I've never seen any stomach-aching, laugh out loud moments like, for example, the scene in Gavin & Stacey last night when Gavin walked into the 'gym.'
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
According to the theory, advertising means increased sales, which means increased profit, which means money to pay for the advertising, and to enable lower prices.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
What? during the film?
No, before the movie starts.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
I mean, they're funny alright, but I've never seen any stomach-aching, laugh out loud moments like, for example, the scene in Gavin & Stacey last night when Gavin walked into the 'gym.'
Just because they aren't the very best shows, doesn't make them bad shows.
Also, Daily Show relies on parody and wit, and is unlikely to be even seeking the sidesplitting guffaw that comes with slapstick-oriented humour. Similarly, Earl is a bit more subtle.
editor
hiraethified
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Who said they were bad?
I think what you said was 'meh' to these shows, because they didn't give you a sidesplitting guffaw, like Gavin and Stacy.
'Meh' would seem to indicate that you consider them unworthy of watching, which would mean they were without merit.
Yep, missed Peep Show. Fifteen stories high I didn't get, but gonna give it another go. Daily Show is good. My Name is Earl I didn't get, but I could see it wasn't formulaic stuff.
Sure it's a fair point that a fair bit of comedy is cultural and doesn't translate, but we still seem to export more to the US than we import. I think we're in good shape on that one. And for drama, I think we don't do too badly despite much lower budgets. We don't have the run lengths of the US, but we do just about manage to keep up with quality - for example, for my personal tastes, I'd say Spooks compares reasonably to 24. And then there's stuff like Shameless or Skins or... there's loads of stuff that gets outside the "safe" zone. I get the feeling that kind of TV is very difficult to get comissioned in the US.
Sure it's a fair point that a fair bit of comedy is cultural and doesn't translate, but we still seem to export more to the US than we import. I think we're in good shape on that one. And for drama, I think we don't do too badly despite much lower budgets. We don't have the run lengths of the US, but we do just about manage to keep up with quality - for example, for my personal tastes, I'd say Spooks compares reasonably to 24. And then there's stuff like Shameless or Skins or... there's loads of stuff that gets outside the "safe" zone. I get the feeling that kind of TV is very difficult to get comissioned in the US.
krtek a houby
Saoirse don Phalaistín!
It appears to be a risk when the militants start threatening beeb producers. I'm no fan of Songs of Praise, either (apart from one filmed in South Africa recently - the music was fabulous) but it's not those of us who generally have no time for religion that risk-takers should be wary of. It's the zealous, fervent in their beliefs types that one worries about.
Having said that, I agree that there should be more risk taking on television and not let the religious fanatics of any persuasion intimidate programme makers.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Frankly, I think this whole comparison thing is stupid. Tv programs exist within a particular cultural milieu. While it might be possible for some shows to make a crossover, others may play to or speak to elements of their own culture that don't translate well. The fact that a british person doesn't enjoy US tv, or vice versa, is probably to be expected in many cases.
I've seen some products of bollywood that I enjoyed, but for the most part, it leaves me cold, or else amuses me when it probably wasn't intended to. I look at the posters, where particular characters are coloured different colours: green, red, blue, and I find it quaint, but also recognize that there is deep cultural meaning and tradition there that I'm not privy to.
It's kind of meaningless for me to say that Indian tv is no good.
I've seen some products of bollywood that I enjoyed, but for the most part, it leaves me cold, or else amuses me when it probably wasn't intended to. I look at the posters, where particular characters are coloured different colours: green, red, blue, and I find it quaint, but also recognize that there is deep cultural meaning and tradition there that I'm not privy to.
It's kind of meaningless for me to say that Indian tv is no good.
I would completely agree - but remember that the debate was started by a Brit preferring US TV. Hence a bit of surprise and counter point.
editor
hiraethified
You seem to have bizarrely completely avoided the beginning of that sentence when I referred to the American shows: "they're funny alright..."
At no point did I say they were bad. You made that bit up. Naughty, twisty Mr Canuck2!
