American TV when it comes to action, supernatural or sci-fi stuff, although that's slowly changing for me with Misfits and Being Human.
British shows when it comes to historical or comedy genres.
But what really gets up my nose is the fact that we tend to lag behind in terms of decent modern day dramas - shows like Grey's Anatomy, The Wire and The West Wing don't need massive budgets, so why are our equivalents usually so unwatchable in comparison?
BTW, high production values don't necessarily result in good television - just look at the mess that was Heroes, for everything after the penultimate episode of Series 1. Misfits has low production values, but is infinitely superior because of the quality of the writing.
I can't think of a single instance of a set wobbling in old Doctor Who. Well, except maybe once, when Ingrid Pitt kicked a wall a bit too hard. The whole wobbly sets thing is an urban myth propogated by lazy journalists.
Speaking for myself, I've seen a lot of British TV and a lot of American TV, and in terms of quality i'd say British leads almost every time. The only current US drama I can think of that I'd voluntarily watch is House. Canada comes out with some good stuff, though.
But Ting! What about that Tom Baker ep. where they are shrunk down and running around his brain?!!
There are so many wobbly sets (along with many other amusingly dodgy set mishaps) in that one. (Which, IMO, makes a pretty bad Who ep. extremely watchable!
We tend to treat TV as more of an art form, whereas the US stretch it as far as they can for commercial gain (see post #3).
I think art is a good description for British comedy, since I don't get it half the time.
I've only watched a little bit of British TV, like on the BBC. It's alright. I like a few British movies. I'm not sure either country's television is better, but the sense of humor does vary I think.
US drama is far superior, there's no debate on that as far as I'm concerned. It's a fairer fight to compare comedy, because budget is less of an issue and the writer's room system in the US means the quality of shows does fluctuate.
I think british comedy is in the doldrums, little britan and crap like this I just dont think is funny.
Only fools and horses is the last real UK Comedy show that was worthy.
I dont think US comedy is that great now, some great shows in the past but not so much now.
As far as my last post, though, I do like Hugh Laurie and those guys, British Whose Line, and Craig Ferguson, but some of the British TV shows I've watched (which I admit is not much), I really didn't get.
Rubicon, Terriers, Breaking Bad (season 3), Party Down, Parks and Recreation, Men of a Certain Age, United States of Tara, Louie, The Colbert Report... nobody has picked those up. And without Sky Atlantic, would anyone have bought Treme or Bored to Death?
On top of that, shows that are picked up are often treated horribly. Seinfeld was famously mishandled, The Office and Friday Night Lights were stuck on ITV3 and ITV4, Veronica Mars was relegated to Trouble, Community has only just been picked up...by VIVA of all channels.
I wish Stephen Colbert was recognised in this country, he's so funny. He would show up a lot of our 'sweary' comedians. The colbert report should have a fixed spot at like 9ish on channel 4 or something like that.
Also the amount of people that i meet who have never seen Curb Your Enthusiasm! Argh, when you hear people discussing how funny things like Miranda are saying things like 'oh god that was hilarious, best thing for years' you feel like grabbing people in the street in Neil Degrasse Tyson style and say 'HAVE YOU HEARD OF THIS SHOW?!'
FNL is one of the finest teen/sporting shows of this generation, yet it's practically unheard of over here. To be fair, it's not massively better known over there.
I prefer American shows although I do like the odd British show such as Peep Show or The Inbetweeners. For one thing I find I get more hooked on US series because you watch them for an hour each week for 6 months - after all that time you really get into them. British series usually last six weeks and take over a year to return. For that reason I find they lack the "must see" quality US shows have for me. I prefer shows I can really follow rather than watch and within a month or two it's already over and I have to find something new.
I think british comedy is in the doldrums, little britan and crap like this I just dont think is funny.
Only fools and horses is the last real UK Comedy show that was worthy.
I dont think US comedy is that great now, some great shows in the past but not so much now.
IMHO recent shows like The Inbetweeners, Mongrels, Outnumbered and Gavin & Stacey, are great comedies. But like most shows, not to everybody's tastes.
American tv series at their best are works of art. And there are a good few brilliant american tv series going back in recent history.
I don't believe i've had the same grand work of art, well structured feeling with british tv compared with american.
Some brit work is interesting but when america get is it right, it's quite...'Wow!' for me anyways
I don't understand why people can't give them the credit they deserve?
Uk tv Quality has definitely got worse in the last decade,whereas US tv is now vastly superior(walking dead,dexter,lost,breaking bad to name a few).
Less money is spent on drama in the Uk now and prime time is largely taken up by lowest denominator shows,which are ok but should be curtailed a bit more to balance it out.
Completely agree with this. US TV has become a must watch over the last few years.
Completely agree with this. US TV has become a must watch over the last few years.
I think what the list of shows mentioned highlights is the advantages of cable in the States. Lost aside, the rest all aired on cable. Sadly, we have nothing comparable over here, with the exception of Sky, but they're far more interested in 'buying' rather than 'making'.
I think what the list of shows mentioned highlights is the advantages of cable in the States. Lost aside, the rest all aired on cable. Sadly, we have nothing comparable over here, with the exception of Sky, but they're far more interested in 'buying' rather than 'making'.
But the BBC, as a public broadcaster that doesn't answer to any advertisers, is supposed to have many of the same advantages that cable channels in the US enjoy -- perhaps even more advantages. And it is easy enough to go through the BBC back-catalogue and point to many programmes that were clearly made with an elitist or artsy sensibility of the kind that one now sees in the best US cable shows. I think the problem is the BBC has simply chosen to be more "common," whether out of political calculation (in response to public complaints about the licence fee, etc.) or some other motive.
But the BBC, as a public broadcaster that doesn't answer to any advertisers, is supposed to have many of the same advantages that cable channels in the US enjoy -- perhaps even more advantages. And it is easy enough to go through the BBC back-catalogue and point to many programmes that were clearly made with an elitist or artsy sensibility of the kind that one now sees in the best US cable shows. I think the problem is the BBC has simply chosen to be more "common," whether out of political calculation (in response to public complaints about the licence fee, etc.) or some other motive.
Well that certainly used to be the case, which is why you'll find examples in the back catalogue. Over the past 4/5 years though the Beeb has taken a lot of flack over the licence fee, and has become increasingly desperate to justify it, which has been difficult when ITV has been beating it to the ratings. As such, they've started appealing more to the lowest common denominator.
You still get the odd decent show coming along, like LoM/A2A, and most recently Garrow's Law, which was superb. Sadly, these shows are fairly few and far between.
It strikes me that this is not a debate about US or UK TV shows but simply a debate about which shows people simply prefer to watch and which they consider commercialised ratings-grabbing rubbish.
Superficially, I would say that I prefer US TV. Mostly, I watch US drama. So, the AMC/HBO/Showtime/FX stuff along with my favourites from the networks (currently The Good Wife, Fringe, Glee etc.). From the UK, I love Doctor Who, Spooks and Hustle. But in reality, they are written and filmed a lot more like US drama shows these days (let's alternatively use the phrase "cinematic" here which is undoubtedly a US art form). So maybe, I just like watching good drama rather than specifically US drama.
Similarly, I wouldn't be caught dead watching soaps or talent shows or quiz shows from either side of the pond and would consider them all to be lowest common denominator TV of the worst sort. I could therefore make the claim that both US *and* UK TV primetime is just packed full of cheap audience-pleasing commercial rubbish and so both US *and* UK TV is the worst you can get. But then that probably just makes me an elitist TV snob.
Alternatively, I really enjoyed the New Zealand TV show This Is Not My Life which I could now take to be representative of all homegrown NZ TV output and therefore I say NZ makes the best TV in the world.
So, to reiterate my point, I don't think this debate has turned out to be about US vs UK TV and I don't really think that debate is a valid one. It's turned into a debate about styles of TV that people prefer to watch.
Well that certainly used to be the case, which is why you'll find examples in the back catalogue. Over the past 4/5 years though the Beeb has taken a lot of flack over the licence fee, and has become increasingly desperate to justify it, which has been difficult when ITV has been beating it to the ratings. As such, they've started appealing more to the lowest common denominator.
You still get the odd decent show coming along, like LoM/A2A, and most recently Garrow's Law, which was superb. Sadly, these shows are fairly few and far between.
As a non-Brit very interested in TV wherever stuff worth watching is made, I have mixed feelings about the BBC. The very idea of the licence fee is something that makes me cringe. Yet, looking at British TV in the last ten years, however bad a job the BBC may be doing, it seems to me that the UK private sector channels are doing worse -- at least in terms of making shows that I would want to see (and let's be honest, that's all that matters.):) So while I have some sympathy for Brits who say the licence fee should be abolished and public TV in Britain should be privatized, I can't say that the UK private sector has shown that they could fill the gap that would be made if the BBC fell. So I guess that makes me pro-BBC and pro-licence fee -- as long as I don't live in Britain and you guys pay it.:D;) But I do think that if a licence fee is going to exist to support the BBC, its justification should not be that the BBC caters to the widest possible audience. Just the opposite. It should be justified on elitist terms -- as necessary to provide the public with the kind of programming that would not be feasible for a private broadcaster to provide because the market for it is too narrow.
I do think that if a licence fee is going to exist to support the BBC, its justification should not be that the BBC caters to the widest possible audience. Just the opposite. It should be justified on elitist terms -- as necessary to provide the public with the kind of programming that would not be feasible for a private broadcaster to provide because the market for it is too narrow.
the main channels in USA are regional up until 8pm i think,not sure id like that here
Not much need for regional diversity in television in a county so centralized. The entire land mass of Great Britain would fit within the state of Wyoming in the US -- a state that has a population of 564,000 people.
what comparison, we start the reality TV crapolution.
While they yanks are constantly chucking out quality TV like Scrubs, Battlestar Glactica, Fire Fly, Lie to Me, 24, Stargate, Dexster, Weeds, Californication, Futurama and sooo many more good shows. There is no comparison.
Not much need for regional diversity in television in a county so centralized. The entire land mass of Great Britain would fit within the state of Wyoming in the US -- a state that has a population of 564,000 people.
Comments
British shows when it comes to historical or comedy genres.
But what really gets up my nose is the fact that we tend to lag behind in terms of decent modern day dramas - shows like Grey's Anatomy, The Wire and The West Wing don't need massive budgets, so why are our equivalents usually so unwatchable in comparison?
BTW, high production values don't necessarily result in good television - just look at the mess that was Heroes, for everything after the penultimate episode of Series 1. Misfits has low production values, but is infinitely superior because of the quality of the writing.
But Ting! What about that Tom Baker ep. where they are shrunk down and running around his brain?!!
There are so many wobbly sets (along with many other amusingly dodgy set mishaps) in that one. (Which, IMO, makes a pretty bad Who ep. extremely watchable!
I think art is a good description for British comedy, since I don't get it half the time.
I've only watched a little bit of British TV, like on the BBC. It's alright. I like a few British movies. I'm not sure either country's television is better, but the sense of humor does vary I think.
I think british comedy is in the doldrums, little britan and crap like this I just dont think is funny.
Only fools and horses is the last real UK Comedy show that was worthy.
I dont think US comedy is that great now, some great shows in the past but not so much now.
I wish Stephen Colbert was recognised in this country, he's so funny. He would show up a lot of our 'sweary' comedians. The colbert report should have a fixed spot at like 9ish on channel 4 or something like that.
Also the amount of people that i meet who have never seen Curb Your Enthusiasm! Argh, when you hear people discussing how funny things like Miranda are saying things like 'oh god that was hilarious, best thing for years' you feel like grabbing people in the street in Neil Degrasse Tyson style and say 'HAVE YOU HEARD OF THIS SHOW?!'
IMHO recent shows like The Inbetweeners, Mongrels, Outnumbered and Gavin & Stacey, are great comedies. But like most shows, not to everybody's tastes.
hear hear
The inbetweeners was ok but dont really like the others.
Completely agree with this. US TV has become a must watch over the last few years.
I think what the list of shows mentioned highlights is the advantages of cable in the States. Lost aside, the rest all aired on cable. Sadly, we have nothing comparable over here, with the exception of Sky, but they're far more interested in 'buying' rather than 'making'.
But the BBC, as a public broadcaster that doesn't answer to any advertisers, is supposed to have many of the same advantages that cable channels in the US enjoy -- perhaps even more advantages. And it is easy enough to go through the BBC back-catalogue and point to many programmes that were clearly made with an elitist or artsy sensibility of the kind that one now sees in the best US cable shows. I think the problem is the BBC has simply chosen to be more "common," whether out of political calculation (in response to public complaints about the licence fee, etc.) or some other motive.
Well that certainly used to be the case, which is why you'll find examples in the back catalogue. Over the past 4/5 years though the Beeb has taken a lot of flack over the licence fee, and has become increasingly desperate to justify it, which has been difficult when ITV has been beating it to the ratings. As such, they've started appealing more to the lowest common denominator.
You still get the odd decent show coming along, like LoM/A2A, and most recently Garrow's Law, which was superb. Sadly, these shows are fairly few and far between.
It strikes me that this is not a debate about US or UK TV shows but simply a debate about which shows people simply prefer to watch and which they consider commercialised ratings-grabbing rubbish.
Superficially, I would say that I prefer US TV. Mostly, I watch US drama. So, the AMC/HBO/Showtime/FX stuff along with my favourites from the networks (currently The Good Wife, Fringe, Glee etc.). From the UK, I love Doctor Who, Spooks and Hustle. But in reality, they are written and filmed a lot more like US drama shows these days (let's alternatively use the phrase "cinematic" here which is undoubtedly a US art form). So maybe, I just like watching good drama rather than specifically US drama.
Similarly, I wouldn't be caught dead watching soaps or talent shows or quiz shows from either side of the pond and would consider them all to be lowest common denominator TV of the worst sort. I could therefore make the claim that both US *and* UK TV primetime is just packed full of cheap audience-pleasing commercial rubbish and so both US *and* UK TV is the worst you can get. But then that probably just makes me an elitist TV snob.
Alternatively, I really enjoyed the New Zealand TV show This Is Not My Life which I could now take to be representative of all homegrown NZ TV output and therefore I say NZ makes the best TV in the world.
So, to reiterate my point, I don't think this debate has turned out to be about US vs UK TV and I don't really think that debate is a valid one. It's turned into a debate about styles of TV that people prefer to watch.
As a non-Brit very interested in TV wherever stuff worth watching is made, I have mixed feelings about the BBC. The very idea of the licence fee is something that makes me cringe. Yet, looking at British TV in the last ten years, however bad a job the BBC may be doing, it seems to me that the UK private sector channels are doing worse -- at least in terms of making shows that I would want to see (and let's be honest, that's all that matters.):) So while I have some sympathy for Brits who say the licence fee should be abolished and public TV in Britain should be privatized, I can't say that the UK private sector has shown that they could fill the gap that would be made if the BBC fell. So I guess that makes me pro-BBC and pro-licence fee -- as long as I don't live in Britain and you guys pay it.:D;) But I do think that if a licence fee is going to exist to support the BBC, its justification should not be that the BBC caters to the widest possible audience. Just the opposite. It should be justified on elitist terms -- as necessary to provide the public with the kind of programming that would not be feasible for a private broadcaster to provide because the market for it is too narrow.
Amen to that. Someone should tell the BBC......
More Life on Mars/Ashes to Ashes+Dr Who, less reality shows, the BBC should be for the stuff that commercial TV can't do anymore
the main channels in USA are regional up until 8pm i think,not sure id like that here
Not much need for regional diversity in television in a county so centralized. The entire land mass of Great Britain would fit within the state of Wyoming in the US -- a state that has a population of 564,000 people.
While they yanks are constantly chucking out quality TV like Scrubs, Battlestar Glactica, Fire Fly, Lie to Me, 24, Stargate, Dexster, Weeds, Californication, Futurama and sooo many more good shows. There is no comparison.
yikes...crazy