ah there is no way the american version is better...its ok tho..better than some of the crap on tv i guess... the gareth-ish character isnt nearly as funny... mackenzie crook just made me feel so ackward watching him..same with ricky gervais...i just wanted to look away but couldnt..lol
the british version is the funnyest and will always be the first. but the american version has alot better writing and more characters which are better deveolped because the show aired longer. Michael Scott's character has alot more depth then david brent as wells and the jim and pam/tim and dawn relationship. Greg Daniels has done alot of realy great shows, king of the hill, SNL, the simpsons, seinfield to name a few, and B.J. Novak is proving himself to be a great writer
I'd like to see the US version, too. We tend to snub US humor in Britain a bit, due to the cultural differences, but if comedy is good it doesn't matter which country it originates from, and we are the only losers for ignoring it. I've only seen the UK Office series and think that part of its success was due to natural documentary-style flow, rather than conventional gags. Is the US version like that or is it styled differently to accomodate a different taste in humour?
Ah, no, I'm am still loyal to the British version. i'm another boxed set nerd (by the way, David Brent's "If You Don't Know Me By Now" is pure comedic gold) I think the fact that it had such a short run was part of it's beauty - it didn't need to overstate things, it kept them fresh and went out on an high. I just think the more...subtle...humour of the British version is what does it for me. The writing is magnificent, it says just enough to make things horribly awkward and cringing without going ott. It's not that all the humour is subtle, just that the biggest moments of comedy come from the prolonged silences, the little glances at the camera, the kind of hopeless ordinaryness of the main characters.
its definitly alot different, id say the american version put more into the characters, deveopment, interaction etc... then humor, the humor is definitly still there but it seems to me that the humor is just a small layer to the show. they both are different shows with different ideas and meaning, but some simalaritys. ive also noticed the first few eps of both shows are alike, the pilot is pretty much the same as the british but as it starts to go along it breaks off and starts doing its own thing.
maybe more development but I disagree that the US version has better writing. The superior dry writing and subtle acting is exactly what makes the british version one of the best sitcoms ever.
as far as writing for humor yes, but over all no, the american version has better writing, the british version stayed manly with david brent and then there was gearth, tim and dawn other then that the show realy didnt get to deep into anyone else there just faces, the american version everyone that works in the office is known and you learn about all of them the story does fallow closer to the main characters but also fallows the other ones unlike the british version.
Although a fantastic series, I would like to have seen a bit more of the other characters in the UK version, rather than acting like distant sattelites to the main stars. For example, in the first series there was this middle aged bald guy that Dave slapped 'Benny Hill' style on top of his slaphead. There was no sign of him in the 2nd series (he was probably made redundant), but it's a shame because he was like a devil's advocate, always hounding Brent with difficult questions. He could have been used more I think. I guess it's all personal choice and we would all direct it differently. It's still a genius show and I really wouldn't mind seeing one more episode made, just to see what Gareth is up to now. Has he married and grown a moustache? Is he still working there? It would be really funny if he's got kids and he's completely changed. That's one theme that wasn't touched on at all.
but your original claim was that it had better writing AND more characters. Then you said the reason it has better character development is because it had more episodes. if you analyze your own logic it would be..... whatever show has the most episodes has the best writing........ the argument seems to be misconstrued doesn't it? Probably because you were wrong to begin with
In the UK version there's this cocky geezer who's called Finchy. Is there an equivalent in the US version?
the american version had better character devlopment is fewer eps, by the time the american version got to ep #14 there was alot more going on. if the british office kept running with only a few character and the same events it evently would have run it self out, it ended on a high note. the american one definitly started pretty rocking but is now doing better, like it said its not as funny but it has other pros. And why are you bashing me im just trying to have a simple debate about writing skills in TV shows.
yeah there is i forget his name but he makes the temp drive him somewhere cause he lost his licence for DUI
Just spotted some little detail in the first scene of the first episode where Dave Brent is interviewing this guy for the fork-lift driver's job. When he says: "Yeah, he's first-aid trained", he crosses himself. His hand goes up, down, right and left. This makes him a Greek Orthodox (except that he uses his left hand, instead of his right, but that's because his right hand is holding the phone). Other Christians cross themselves left to right. Since his surname is Brent, then it must be that his fictional mother must hence be either Greek or Cypriot. The amount of detail on this TV program is mind blowing. I will look to see if I can find any more totally insignificant information
not bashing you, just COMPLETELY disagree with you. If thats your idea of bashing, anything short of me stroking your ego must be a bash..... peace