Quote: M Lewis @ April 24 2008, 10:34 AM BSTWhen he got his contract was he not a famous actor, star of his own SAS show, liked by millions and with a good idea?
I'm sure he was stubborn by the other stuff must have been usefull.
Yeah. Arguably he was the biggest TV actor in the country. (If you think in terms of people watching him.)
The only way the format will get you any money is if it's sold to the US.
Quote: Seefacts @ April 24 2008, 10:40 AM BSTYeah. Arguably he was the biggest TV actor in the country. (If you think in terms of people watching him.)
The only way the format will get you any money is if it's sold to the US.
Or other people write on your show.
Quote: YesNo @ April 23 2008, 5:46 PM BSTThat's why Ricky Gervais became very rich when they made The Office: An American Workplace (or whatever they called it).
and even then he only made real money when it was picked up for a second run and only made real big money when it became a massive hit. As it only got picked up as a result of The 40 year old virgin's success meaning the network suddenly had a big star on the project and only became a hit because the writers do funny, long term entertainment in a way Gervais cant hope to.......it shows how removed Gervais and Merchants talents are from the end result. Gervais could have argued the format was worth X million but he would have had little to back it up other than a quirky show .000001% of yanks had seen.
Quote: Marc P @ April 24 2008, 10:58 AM BSTOr other people write on your show.
And that!
So presumably you'd have to get format rights? Oh, I don't know . . .
You'd probably sign a contract, but no party would get any money for it.
Quote: M Lewis @ April 24 2008, 10:59 AM BSTand even then he only made real money when it was picked up for a second run and only made real big money when it became a massive hit. As it only got picked up as a result of The 40 year old virgin's success meaning the network suddenly had a big star on the project and only became a hit because the writers do funny, long term entertainment in a way Gervais cant hope to.......it shows how removed Gervais and Merchants talents are from the end result. Gervais could have argued the format was worth X million but he would have had little to back it up other than a quirky show .000001% of yanks had seen.
The American version is terrible! Really unfunny and souless.
Hmmm. I actually like the American version. It started very weakly, I admit, but it has really developed into a very good show indeed. It is very different to the original, premise excluded, which is no bad thing since it avoids outright imitation. It fact, I seem to laugh more at the American one than I did the original. Controversial!
I'm with you!
I love the yank version. Seefacts, how much have you seen? You have to get past the first half of season 1 and reach the point where they find their own feet.
Steve Carell is the reason Gervais is rich!
Gervais would be rich by anybody's standards even without the American version of the Office, especially when you factor in DVD sales. Yes, the American version has probably pushed him into the earning stratosphere, but he made a bundle on the original show. Not to mention all the lucrative offers that came his way after it's enormous success.
"Gervais would be rich by anybody's standards even without the American version of the Office"
Really? I cant see that?
Don't just factor in the money he made from writing The Office, and DVD sales of The Office (one of the biggest selling DVD's of all time), and the money he made from selling the programme overseas, but also the money he's made as a direct result of the success of the Office. Remember Extras was not just a BBC sitcom, but a co-production with HBO (no slouches in the money department). And if he'd never written the original Office he'd have never got to sell Flanimals or been given shed loads of money to appear in Ben Stiller movies...
None of that has anything to do with the admittedly excellent American version of the Office.
Yes - but the HBO deal and a lot of the american mates stuff would have been as a result of being the man behind the massive US version (ugly bloke behind monster sitcom...HBO think he's a short LD)
The UK version would have got him respect in the US but when it was obvious what was happening with the US office he went to a whole new level.
Depends what you regard as rich. You dont buy a £3m house (and hope to run it) on DVD sales of a UK sitcom (i'd have thought)
In a way, discussing Gervais is a red herring since he's a writer performer. It would probably make more sense to look at Peter Baynham or Dick Clement and Ian Le Frenais... I still think, if you write a moderately succsesful sitcom then it's a nice living, and one that can provide you with a nice nest egg in your retirement. Take Carla Lane. She hasn't had a hit in years, or even a show on telly, but last time I saw her interviewed she was in a nice house in the country (conclusive proof, I think you'll agree!)
Unless its for a blur video.
Who was the blonde glamour model in that video with the really annoying voice? And where is she now?
Carla Lane is a good example - loads of monster BBC hits over 20 years. She has a nice house in the country. Gervais had one hit get syndicated and has a pool in his basement that cost twice what carla lane has to go out campaigning to raise in order to keep her animal sanctuary open!
and jo guest was in the blur video...where is she now? no idea.
Syndication does indeed put you into earning orbit. But to me all the people we're discussing have a relatively comfortable lifestyle. It would perhaps be more interesting to look at the bank balances of the poor bastards who wrote Perfect World or Eyes Down.