I like them both equally. Although I am rather fond of the quantity of episodes you get with American shows. Makes purchasing American sitcom DVDs better value for money.
American VS British sitcoms Page 2
On a cultural level, there is one glaring difference between American and British sitcoms and that has to do with the consequences of individual actions versus society and the rammifications thereof -
In a British sitcom, the external influence of society - friends, family, work place, local government, etc. - exists to cause conflict with the main character, usually victimising him / her and the comedy derives from the situations this dynamic creates.
Whereas in an American sitcom, it's the actions of the individual against society - lying, cheating, stealing, etc. - that are the instigators for conflict. Because American sitcoms view soceity as being a fair and balanced place, the main character is usually punished for their foolish and greedy actions.
Or to put it more simply - American sitcom characters are pro-active and British sitcom characters are re-active.
Compare and contrast -
Friends vs. Dad's Army
Bewitched vs. Citizen Smith
Seinfeld vs. Only Fools and Horses
Though Society triumphs in both instances, it's how it wins that shows off the marked differences between the cultures. In American sitcoms it's 'this is what happens when you try to trick society' and in British sitcoms it's 'no matter where you go or what you do, society will find you and crush you'.
I'm sure there will be individual cases on both sides that don't conform to this model - but in the main, those are the main differences I can see.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ November 20 2009, 10:45 AM GMTOr to put it more simply - American sitcom characters are pro-active and British sitcom characters are re-active.
Compare and contrast -
Seinfeld vs. Only Fools and Horses
Surely Seinfeld is re-active and Fools pro-active?
Quote: chipolata @ November 20 2009, 10:47 AM GMTSurely Seinfeld is re-active and Fools pro-active?
Acutally you're right, it should be the other way round. Thankfully, I added that bit about not all sitcoms fitting this dynamic, so I'm still right.
Phew.
American sitcoms always have commercial breaks, whereas British ones don't always have them. And people in American sitcoms mostly have bigger houses or flats.
Do I get a gold star, Mummy?
Quote: chipolata @ November 20 2009, 10:04 AM GMTI like them both equally.
Yes; if it's good, I like it, doesn't matter if it was made here or America.
That's a good, valid point, Sam.
British people have no self belief...as such they view anyone better off than themselves with jealousy and hatred. Yanks believe they can achieve what they like so view those with more than themselves as something to aspire to.
Hence...we have EastEnders (poor, ugly people living in dumps) and they have 90210.
With sitcoms, they have attractive and successful people while we have unattractive, unsuccessful people. Modern Family is a perfect yank example...they all have massive homes and look great.
Another good example is The office...ours was basically "isnt it miserable here"...theirs is "isnt it fun here".....their David Brent drives a convertible and gets to date hot women!
The dislike of anything better than ones own situation...is a horrible british syndrome. Gervais has picked up on it a few times...in fact, his first TV show cast him as the boss of a video store worth a couple of million - probably made him one if the wealthiest sitcom characters ever....and the show never got picked up!
Agreed. Certainly by tradition, US and UK comedy has held different viewpoints on aspiration and failure.
Imagine you were going to make a comedy about a supermarket checkout girl, working in a run down town, who one day wins millions on the lottery. In the US, you would follow this girl as she suddenly escapes poverty and moves away from her shitty home town. In the UK, however, you would make your comedy about the best friend she leaves behind, the one stuck on the tills forever.
Quote: Pete @ November 20 2009, 11:50 PM GMTThe dislike of anything better than ones own situation...is a horrible british syndrome.
Yes, but equally horrible is the American dislike of what they see as failure. How callous is it to invent 'loser' as a term of abuse; it's hardly cricket, what what?
Do they have 'magnanimous' in the American dictionary?
Obviously, they are intended for very different cultures/audience reaction, but I "still" tick the British Box!!!
In my opinion, British TV as a whole seems to have more substance, planning, effort and regardless of the genre, more believable.
Has it been mentioned that British ones tend to be written by one or two guys, but the US like using a team?
Yes, the Americans are now totally sold on the idea of team writing - I think most of their sitcoms are now written that way. It makes the shows funny but in my opinion, thee isn't a great deal of difference between the styles of comedy or humour. With most Britcoms I think you get a clear personality with each one on the whole, although not all of them are that funny. So there is a real difference in type of product being made, between us and them.
Another factor to consider is - How many US sitcoms do we recreate - hardly any. How many UK sitcoms do the US recreate - quite a lot. For me that suggests the Brithish are much better at creating memorable characters and situations.
What the US are better at is the complex, multi thread sitcoms with clever writing. I think we are better at the trad character based sitcom.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ November 21 2009, 10:24 AM GMTWhat the US are better at is the complex, multi thread sitcoms with clever writing.
One Foot in the Grave ?
