Today’s lecture (week 4) really brought up interesting points about how television is taken and adapted from its country of origin to suit its target audience. The concept of taking a popular show and adapting it towards a different market has always fascinated me, especially when it comes to the range of adaptations. Many successful localisations to Australia include and have included Big Brother, The Biggest Loser, and current heavyweight champion, Masterchef.
A particularly successful one, for example, Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? had its beginnings in the UK in 1998, and has since been adapted and localised for over 100 countries worldwide. It is interesting not only for its success in its original adapted form, but for the amount of successful spin-offs, including Millionaire Hot Seat (the format we currently use) and 50:50. The reason for the overwhelming success of Millionaire can be debated, but a few reasons off the top of my head would include its accessibility by any age, gender or race, and its ability to work with the concept of the public viewing, allowing families or individuals to feel apart of the show through its Q&A format.
While there are many successful adaptations, there will always be those what were they thinking? attempts. One most relevant to Australia is the attempted localisation of popular Australian comedy series Kath & Kim to the United States. This show proved to be a hit here because it worked on the stereotyping of the everyday Australian. When it came to creating the version for the U.S., however, it failed dismally, being canned after a few episodes. Why? Because the cultural differences were too large. The characters portrayed in the show worked here because of the colloquialisms and likeness to the everyday Australian. Try to have an American actor/actress use similar vernacular, even in a more culturally similar sense to the audience the show is marketed towards,the divide between the original’s charm and the remake’s charm proves too much for a remake to be successful.
Transnationalism is good, but too much of it can be a bad thing. Localisation must be thought out carefully before being put into action, otherwise we’ll end up with more singing/dancing/cooking/weight-loss shows than we should be made to endure. See ya.
Crunching post Zach. It’s always interesting how some shows will work brilliantly in some countries and not others. America have often grabbed successful shows from overseas, Kath and Kim like you mentioned, Wilfred and even Skins, but often what they don’t consider is will they be compatible for the American sense of humour? Let’s be honest, it’s vastly different from the British and the Australian.
Perfect example of the complexities of transnational mediums like television and film is my observations of how people from different countries have reacted to iconic Australian movies like the Castle. I’ve showed it to my British mates, who’ve loved the the ridiculous characters in the film, especially Daryl’s complete trust in the foolhardy lawyer Denis, but American’s become to confused with the little Aussie subtleties (mind you this is the castle, it’s not that subtle) and become lost. I know this is TV cultures where studying, but the same rules apply when a show that’s entrenched in it’s native countries culture is shown to a foreign audience.
That’s why I agree with your observation that show’s which travel well are very generic. Every country dances, sings and enjoys your one size fit’s all crime drama with outrageously good looking detectives. If it’s not a reality TV show the script needs to be a user friendly, spoon fed, easily dubbed into Iranian, if it can be exported around the world like a barrel of oil.
If it’s not that palatable it probably won’t work.