As someone who’s only seen the UK version, I really love the contradictions each character has. I like the captain’s stern demeanour and his soft interior, or Julian’s selfishness mixed with a need to be liked. Robin especially (my favourite character) is wise and intelligent and eager to learn, but he’s also still dumb and easy to scare (even though objectively he is the second scariest ghost).
@@srstacy Thomas Thorne, the creepy poet with no respect for boundaries (emotional or physical), and has literal withdrawal symptoms when he doesn’t heavy-handedly flirt with Alison, who is a married woman who has told him repeatedly over and over again that she is not interested in him that way and that she doesn’t want him acting like that.
I agree with this perfectly. The US version everyone is far less of a character. They are more stereotypes that are too human. Takes away from the comedy and more into a drama. The jokes also don't land as well
The take away here is that the American version is designed to appeal to the American brighter, happier, more obvious sense of humour where the British one is designed to appeal to the British, downbeat, gloomier, more subtle sense of humour. Horses for courses.
I watched both, and absolutely preferred the UK. It's just my opinion, but I think the USA versions of shows having like 20 episodes a season weirdly makes the writing shallower? When you have to write 20 episodes of a sitcom, you basically need to write a bunch of big personalities, establish them early on, and then have 20 episodes worth of changing situations. So the characters can't ever really change or develop, because the moment they did can be lost in the filler. Whereas in the UK version, the lower episode count means they could do some really major changes and trust it wouldn't be lost. (Like, in the USA version, they were so scared of disturbing the status quo that they changed Marys "death" into Flower getting trapped in the well for a few episodes so everyone thought she was dead. All the mourning was undercut by jokes, and the audience had all of ten seconds thinking something major had finally happened. It really ruined what was genuinely a great plot in Ghosts UK)
@@FirePercy Maybe he meant it look more modern with the brighter and more saturated colour? Or the US ghost characters are more modern as opposed to the UK ghost consisting of mostly aristocrat
@johnlbirch Different lives create different art. The Class system is a vast thing in British thought, America prefers to see itself as class free. Thus the tiny class difference between Lister and Rimmer on RED DWARF generates vast amounts of comedy. It is differences in up bringing and values that generates the comedy between Thurston Howl and Gilligan. And you need a class difference as vast as that between a working class man and an old money multimillionaire to run class comedy in America. The two shows have to take different paths in order to function at all.
@@poseidonskidfromfrance Don't be a creepy little snob. Just because you were taught to hate Americans and Jews doesn't make bigotry virtuous or wise. Different doesn't equal inferior.
16:50 To be fair, that's kinda the point. Julian is a Conservative MP from the late 80s-early 90s. They arent really known to be good people here in the UK
Julian is a real sweetie compared to Alan B'Stard (played by Rik Mayall) from late 80s / early 90s satirical sitcom The New Statesman. Both are parodies of a particular breed of Thatcherite MP who rose to prominence during the 80s - i.e brash, amoral, corrupt, impulsive and prone to infidelity and sexual misadventure.
They are all cut from the same cloth and they all have awful inexcusable behaviors, picking sides and saying "this side good, this side bad" is just disingenuous.
The thing I like about the UK version is something you saw as a negative. Yes, the ghosts quarrel about little things but if you have an eternity with each other, it's the little things that will start to become the elephant in the room.
like how when your dating, you dont know that your partner really likes to eat garlic bread in bed, and after your married you start waking up with crumbs in your nooks and crannies
The US version has the quarrelling as well, but it is much more toned down, and not their primary characteristics. Each ghost has elements to grow with and you spend a lot of time rooting for them, as they are just more likable than anyone on the UK version. And Mike specifically on the UK version was terrible, just an unlikable idiot, Jay is so much more upbeat and supportive and a much better character.
@@darthwingnut464 you just explained why the uk is better, why should you root for them, its a comedy, not a drama, rooting for there growth takes away from the humour, americans just dont understand how to do humour right
@@darthwingnut464 I find the UK versions endearing in their imperfections and general negative traits. It makes any time that they genuinely do something redeemable so much stronger I do like the American version but the characters can be a bit too bouncy and upbeat for my tastes. I think that the two leads are comparably weak. Having said that however, I think that is what makes the US remake worthwhile. If it tried to hit all the same notes, it would be a copy for the sake of being a copy. Instead, it took what was an excellent premise and tailored it to an American audience. Now everyone wins. I'm also sure that there will be proponents of both from opposite sides of the pond. As it is,, everyone wins and neither detracts from the other.; pick your poison.
You complain that the mansion characters in the UK are mostly aristocrats. That would be because in the UK only aristocrats or their servants would have lived in mansions. So it makes a lot more sense than a bunch of random characters.
In the US version, the only full-time resident of the house was Hetty, bc iirc Woodstone wasn't built before her time, whereas Button House was originally Tudor and has been passed down through way more generations. It started as a Tudor building of the Bones, hence why Humphrey lived there. Then supposedly Mary was a servant there in the Stuart era, and then Kitty was adopted by the Higham family, who led to Isabelle in the Regency. Thomas is clearly a member of society, so yeah he and his cousin were middle-upper class. Eventually the line goes to Fanny and George. A grand total of 4 residents of Button House ghosts were nobility/aristocracy (3 more than the American version, although Trevor and Isaac were probably middle-upper class based on their lifestyle/status/income). You could argue that the Captain and Julian were also from upper class backgrounds and got status through nepotism or buying their way in or reputation, but i wouldn't call them strictly aristocracy, same as their American counterparts. I guess in terms of quantity, the British version does technically have more, but I don't think it really impacts the story? Humphrey is the most humble and down-to-earth of them all, and Kitty is incredibly sweet, if ditzy. Fanny and Hetty are ofc very snobby, which is part of their character, but other than than, I don't think class or status really makes that much difference and still makes sense for the characters in terms of timeline, though I do understand the complaint in a way.
I'm not picking a side in your Anglosphere arguments, but I justed wanted to point out that English is just mangeled Dutch with nearly half French words and a small bit of Norse words and not even a smidge of anything Celtic. English is an hilarious abomination of a language with hardly a rule to it due to it's mangled state.
@@thejudgmentalcritter6584 McMansion is a pejorative term for a large, "mass-produced" house in a suburban community that is marketed to the upper middle class in developed countries. I'd recommend having a look at the blog mcmansionhell by Kate Wagner
The UK cast before Ghosts worked on a sketch comedy show called Horrible Histories which had a lot of broad comedy bits. One of their regular bits was called "Stupid Deaths" which was parodied in one of the US episodes.
@@lenawagenfuehr53 Most of the writers from Ghosts UK were in Horrible Histories. Julian was Death, Robin was a King. Thomas and has played Shakespeare in a film the cast wrote called Bill. Lady Fanny played Boudica celt warrior that took on the Roman army. Pat played King George IV and Mozart.
Yeah, also explains why there wasn’t much variation in the ages of the UK ghosts. The cast was already a team who had worked together for years and were of a similar age (Monty Python would be the best comparison)
British comedies don't have the need for characters to be likeable as a basic premise. The UK version works like Sartre's "Huis Clos" - they're housemates rather than friends, and they've been trapped together for centuries. It's because of their bad character traits that they can't move on, and they only start to evolve because they are interacting with a living person and change is introduced into the house. That allows for some really poignant moments. The US version is ok, but the idea that one is better than the other is a really bad place to start from. They are just different and taste is subjective.
Thank u, Jillian pushing Alison is gonna make him unlikeable and that's ok, it's called character development, the ghosts learned to be a family because of Alison
I remember listening to a BTS video for a show and the director mentioned "letting the characters be ugly" which I think fits here, and I think can describe the differences between quite a few shows that have UK and US versions
The two ghosts we see move on after being stuck in the uk one both had to overcome some major personality issues or trauma in order to move on, Annie with learning to stand up to men, and mary talking about the witch trial.
I like both shows pretty much equally. The real difference between them is that they're both made for different audiences. British comedies tend to have a drier wit while American ones tend to favour broader comedy, and British characters often have rougher edges that would get rounded off in the States. They both work in their own ways. And Robin is frikkin' adorable.
Yeah, the difference in humour is a big reason why I prefer the UK version. The US version is entertaining in its own way but the humour on a lot of American sitcoms, this one included, tends to be too "in your face" for my liking.
Great video, only thing to note is the part where you talked about how small the UK mansion is. The UK mansion is more of a stately home, and although still large in size, they tend to be surprisingly small in room size. This could be because these homes can be centuries old and the population has gradually gotten taller and larger over time, but these homes tend to have more rooms rather than less rooms for more floor space. Just a fun fact, doesn't detract from the video, just the more you know :)
I've never watched horrible histories but this cast does work so well together. I have tried to watch the US version but it just hasn't sucked me in the way the UK version did. They also ended the show on a high note and left me wanting more. I have also cried a few times when you find out how each ghost died.
the uk cast already acted together for decades and on lots of other shows, and their chemistry and friendship was just so much better and the uk one is clear because of this and the actors work better together
i feel like the UK's Alison is more appealing to me because of her reaction and irritation. Imagining having to live with ten other people all of a sudden, it would suck. I feel like it also makes her relationships with the ghosts more believable since she isn't instantly befriending them. Also, i prefer the UK acting wise.
having seen both. I would describe the UK ghosts as being more like a family and the US ghosts as being friends that live together, which explains why in the US they are more friendly and upbeat with each other and the UK they argue more. The two joes have done an amazing job of making the show fit an American audience while keeping the core essence of the original UK show. UK and US humor doesn't always cross the pond well as US comedy generally tends to have more positivity. Alison and Mike felt like a typical UK couple with Mike not really forming a good relationship with the ghosts as he can't see them whereas Jay being into comics, sci-fi and movies allows him to be more interested in the ghosts and form a good relationship of sorts with some of the ghosts, which initially felt like a device they felt they needed to make Jay have relevance to the show because he can't see them, but the two joes have made it work well.
Makes sense that the UK version they act like family bc they're all distantly related! "You all come from me, and my sister." To quote Robin, lol. I rather prefer the UK version bc of the cast's chemistry, and I was raised on a lot of UK shows. Your opinion makes a lot of sense, very well articulated!
Actually Thomas died in in 1824. It is literally stated in the show. Specifically, Oct 10th 1824. Also, the headless tudor noble has a name, he's Sir Humphrey Bone and he's my 2nd favourite character.
Sir Humphreys's character is a lot bigger in the UK version the rocker biker is nearly non-existent in the US version I guess mainly because he was passing through and was not a past owner of the house
Pat specifically died in 1984 and Thomas died in 1824, not 1796. I like that the UK ghosts and Alison start out disliking each other. You get to see the ghosts loosen up and remember how to have fun thanks to their connection to a living person and Alison learns how to live with the ghosts instead of around them.
I've watched both, but as a Brit I will always side with the UK one. But I was very pleasantly surprised by the US adaptation. They both had different areas of history to draw on. The difference in comedy styles is I think in down to the respective psyches of the two nations. Us Brits tend to be darker, more frustrated, and we tend to root for the underdog trying in tough situations. US comedies tend to be much more (sometimes relentlessly) positive and upbeat, much like the Americans I know. Both versions have made me cry more than I feel I should at a silly comedy show. There is a lot of depth to both.
and old houses had smaller rooms a Victorian bedroom in a large house would barely have room for a modern double bed but it would have an adjoining dressing room.
Im dying because the UK version at 18:20 is honestly how I'd react, id be a bit concerned about the lack of pants but id more so be concered about them getting hurt than their preferred work attire. (I am an American incase that wasn't obvious)
I remember watching a video talking about the different humor styles of the UK and US, primarily using the Office for comparison. It seems that UK humor is tailored for cynicism, while US humor has a more lighthearted approach, at least for television
I think the UK version is more realistic in some ways. Ghosts stuck in purgatory are going to be there for a reason. Maybe not being able to let go of little things, bickering with people all the time, and being capable of pushing someone out of a window are telling of why they haven't moved on. And although it's certainly really positive thinking of Sam to be glad she's not mentally ill and just has a weird power, it's almost overly positive. That all being said, merely being realistic doesn't always make for a more enjoyable watching experience and I'm not sure which I prefer.
Robin is the absolute best! He's so funny and nice. But also has one of the deepest feelings. He looks simple and dimwitted on the outside, but he's so smart and complex on the inside. Alison even says that directly to him right as he gets distracted by a bunny methinks.
Wow you acknowledge a lot of good points but, you left stuff out like, when Alison finds out that Julian pushed her in season 4 she decides to move house as she doesn’t want to live with him but he refuses to apologise as he sees Alison seeing ghosts as a good thing, I love this episode because Julian (the pantsless one) gives a really good speech about how he doesn’t regret pushing her as it’s the best thing he ever did. There are also other good plot lines like the plague ghosts in the basement finding out who killed them and I love robins episode when he saves Mike from lightning as he is able to channel electricity. Overall I love the different storylines in the American version but UK wins every time.
So I've watched the entirety of the UK Ghosts, and it's one of my favourite shows ever. I remember when my parents and I watched it for the first time, we kept having to pause because we were laughing so much we couldn't breathe. Plus, I grew up with the Ghosts UK cast, since I religiously watched Horrible Histories as a kid. I think it's kind of impossible to determine which is "better", since aside from the premise, they each have completely different styles of comedy/approach's to the situation, which is exactly what you highlighted. So it's entirely down to personal preference: the pessimism of the UK, or the optimism of the US. I've never watched Ghosts US, and I don't think I ever will, but I can definitely see why you would prefer it. What I will say, is that when it comes to the pessimism of the UK version, I think it helps the characters dynamics. "This is shit and we're all stuck together in this shit", is absolutely true, but it means that the characters are forced to put up with the situation, which leads them to develop closer connections and relationships. Rather than the immediate positivity in the US version, Alison slowly builds relationships with the ghosts, which I really like. They make the best out of a mediocre situation, and all the ghosts show this underlying kindness, connection and appreciation for each other, that aren't initially visible. They're a family that's forced to live together constantly, so of course they're going to get annoyed with each time to time, but they still appreciate each other. I'm obviously biased, but if you're up for it, I would recommend giving the UK version another shot, since it can be very emotional and sweet when it needs to be. Also, in regards to Julian pushing Alison out of the window, yes, it definitely makes him look bad, and it does get brought up again, since he's the reason Alison has to live with seeing ghosts.
@@lenawagenfuehr53 definitely, I loved how they brought it back! And all the characters have little arcs, but I think Julian’s is the most obvious/apparent. I haven’t read the Button House Archive book yet either but I’d love to it looks so funny 😭😭
One of my favorite things from the US version is that the one of the cast from the UK cameo'd in an episode as an actor portraying Pete's "dumbest death."
I think what I love about UK Ghosts is that it’s different. Obviously the style of humour is undoubtedly British but it just feels unique. With US Ghosts it just feels like any other American sitcom
But can brit say the sane thing or would they say the reverse and say " the us version is clearly American but felt unique while the uk version felt like any other british sitcom."
@jjdoughboy2103 As a Brit, yes, it feels like every other american sitcom but with a paranormal twist, where as the UK one feels less americanised than a few recent UK sitcoms, also the characters are played by the actors from Horrible histories and a bunch of the writers are, so its the comedy from our childhoods
I think the tone difference is mainly a cultural thing , I’m a big fan of BBC Ghosts, but I find the American version almost unwatchable. Comedy in the US and the UK can be really different and I think cynicism might just gel better with people in the uk. Also half the cast of Ghosts were the cast of a really iconic childrens show , so there all literally icons if you grew up in the 2000s or 2010s
And the actors are not all American either. This stupid snobbery of "British humour is just perfect" needs to stop. You do know Benny Hill is British, right?
I've had the exact same experience! Must be cultural proximity. With perhaps a smidgen of 700 years. I still had a couple "oh that's so British" moments (Alison pretending to be a Ghosts etc.), but those were honestly handled quite well, so I while they aren't my favorite moments, it's still enjoyable.
@@lenawagenfuehr53Facts hurt mate. British comics are just better. The humour is better! The jokes are just all around better. American comedy is stupid and predictable. The British just own it. Absolutely no argument And what's wrong with Hill?.
Only a select elite few were invited to those “extra” activities, a random finance bro like Trevor wouldn’t be. Also there’s a chance Trevor is just lying about going to the party to sound cool to the others it’s not like they’ll know.
As an Australian British comedy shows tend to be better resseved In Australia we outsource our TV show from the UK and USA because it's cheaper and we'll our stuff is shit. Because of our culture, dark humour and underdog stories work best Example: instead of bugs bunny, the sarcastic winner Daffy duck is more popular as he's always the losing sinic
There are so many times when you say you dont like the UK version because "paints X character in a really negative light/makes them seem stupid". This is 100% where cultural humour varies between the UK and US. I wouldnt find it a negative of a comedy if some characters are flawed. However, I actually had the opposite issue with US Ghosts. I struggled to get into it because the characters felt one dimensional and a lot of the jokes felt like they relied on stereotypes of what someone from that time period would be like. Like The Captain, in the UK version the joke isnt that he's gay, it's that he doesn't realise. The US one just hammered as many gay jokes so heavy handedly that its clear that the joke is just "hes gay haha"
That makes a lot of sense! It kind of irked me that they used Issac's actor, who has played the flamboyant gay character before. The lighting also creates more depth in the UK version imo.
I was stuggling to figure out why i disliked the US version sm but jesus, you really got it right!! Watching this video, I keep being put off by the lack of flaws the US ghosts have compared to the familial banter and errors made by the UK cast..
I have watched all of the BBC version and 2 seasons of the CBS version, and I have to say I have a clear preference towards the UK’s. I might be a little bias considering I am British myself and I have grown up with these actors from Horrible Histories. (I am just going through the video and adding my own comment onto your opinion) - Captain and Isaac. I’m glad Isaac is from the Revolutionary Wars (is that it? I don’t know American history). It’s a change that allows them to act differently. I much prefer the way they deal with The Captain’s sexuality than Isaac’s. The Captain really feels like a person who has had to hide his identity his whole life, while Isaac acts like your stereotype of gay people. - Yeah, Pat and Pete are very similar. I like them both, but I kind of wish they changed Pete up a little. - Fanny and Hetty. I like how both of them change over the show and adapt to modern day life. I don’t mind that Fanny makes more comments than Hetty as I feel like it works for both of them. I enjoy that Hetty dislikes the Irish as it was a fun gag throughout. Also, Fanny being called Fanny was a great choice by the team as it gets a lot of jokes! (“Oh no! Fanny’s exposed”) - Robin and Thorfin. I enjoy their personalities and differences. I don’t find Robin’s voice funny but that doesn’t take away from his character. - Julian and Trevor. I much prefer Julian over Trevor! Julian being corrupt is what makes him funny and I found Trevor a little bit too nice. - Thomas. I’m glad they didn’t translate how horny he is over because I don’t think it would work in the US version. His humour comes from how quick he falls in love with people, but it is done in a way that I borderline creepy and funny. I don’t think the US version would be able to pull it off. - Kitty is lovely. I enjoy how her naivety is a contrast to a lot of the other ghosts. - Mary is such a fun character. The way she speaks adds a lot of humour! (She started the whole “Sucked off” joke) - I enjoy how the UK version sticks to the same characters as it makes the characters feel trapped. They barely add ghost character. The only one I can think of is Maddocks, and I like that they do this because it is believable that he has been there for years and he isn’t in the house. - Alberta’s fun. I think the mystery around her death is great and it’s frustrating that they didn’t do it with many of the other characters. The US version gives away too many of their deaths right away and it’s boring! (Don’t know the quote but it felt like, “I’m Thorfin and I can control lights because I was hit my lightning.”) We didn’t know The Captain or Kitty’s death till series 5. However, I thought the episode that revealed her death was extremely disappointing! - Sassapis my beloved! My favourite character of the bunch. I love his humour and it’s much nicer to watch compared to the others. I feel like his character is the most like the BBC characters. - Flower. I like the idea. She just has one joke though and it gets so boring! - What was the point of having the headless ghost in CBS? I don’t even remember his name and I wouldn’t be surprising if the show doesn’t either. He feels pointless compared to Humphrey, who is a much more developed character. - I enjoy the BBC characters so much more because they have a darker humour. The US’s characters’ humour is barely there and they can be quite unbearable to watch at times. They make jokes that have been really dumbed down for their audience. I think the age is worse in the US as the US just doesn’t have as much history. Take the 20th century. In the UK, you have Fanny, The Captain, Pat, and Julian. In the US, you have Alberta, headless guy, Flower, Pete, dead prom girl, and Trevor. There just feels like too many of their eras overlap. - Yeah. Alison and Mike are far more bearable than Sam and Jay. Sam is so frustrating to watch! I hate how Sam and Jay are financially okay. They say they are struggling, but that never really comes across. So much of the plot from Alison and Mike’s financial troubles (Taking out loan and being trapped, getting the builders in, having the film set, their actions in the dinner party, and trying to sell it to a hotel chain. Just to name a few.) Sam and Jay’s situation is just kinda boring. I do like how Jay is more interested in the ghosts though.
with what you said about the deaths, I completely agree, i am biased towards the uk one because i watched horrible histories religiously, however when i watched the US version for the first time, the very first episode felt like it was just "hi i'm this character and i died because of this" or "hi other character you're so good at that because you died due to this" like i do understand that they have to set the scene, but at the same time, show don't tell
I’ve seen every episode of both shows and am from the us . I completely agree with you on most every point. The us version has just rounded off all the personalities and made them too “ likable” , perky and nice. They are bland. The only character in the us version I prefer is Jay simply because they give him more to say and do. I feel the uk version has more history,pathos and soul. The financial struggles are more realistic for Allison and Mike. The uk version is just a richer experience. Even the house is more effective than the us set. I really miss this show. What we have now is just a pale reflection of the uk version.
Masterful comment! That whole "Hi, I'm bla. And I died like bla." Is the whole reason my family and I stopped watching after five minutes. They remove the main sticking point. I do have to disagree on one thing: I liked Kitty's death episode. Quite unexpected, yet good and believable as well. Though maybe it's just the biologist in me that likes spiders. Or maybe it's that it's a mystery episode. The Captain's I feel could be better. I don't believe it makes sense that he wouldn't have a service revolver in '45. And him breaking in and pretending to be someone else just felt a bit off with his near religious fanaticism for King, Country and the Army. But that's just me and my dad's takes. Nobody has to agree to it. Overall the ending episodes weren't quite as well as the rest of the series in my opinion. Though it doesn't help that I'm comparing it to Tedd Lasso, which we we're watching at the time of the last episodes. That series is AMAZING. I've compared to the writings of SIR TERRY PRATCHETT (GNU Terry Pratchett. Speak his name) off all things (!) when it comes to quality and live truths. Then you know it's good. Their Dutch episode is even Dutch approved (By me) even though it's set in just Amsterdam. Which normally would disqualify it immediately. I don't know how we ended up going from Ghosts to Tedd Lasso, but I'm recommending it now. Go watch it!
@@BasicallyBaconSandvichIV oh no! I love Kitty’s death episode! I love how we were given hints throughout the whole show to suggest that it was Eleanor, but it happened to be no one’s fault. It was a death no one predicted. And I love how Kitty is positive about the day she died, which is such a contrast compared to the others. No, I hate Alberta’s death! It’s so bad! It starts off with a decent mystery, and ends suddenly without any real achievement. Apparently Hetty knew all the time? That could have worked if it was hinted to much earlier in the show. Also, that’s not really how I view The Captain’s death. I view that he went there because he knew Haver was going to be there, and he didn’t know if he was going to see him again. Personally, I struggle to watch his death because I get second hand embarrassment from it because I wouldn’t do what he did. But, I think it makes sense for him.
@@A_Mini_A OH! That makes a lot more sense! Sorry I was a bit tired when I read it. It being past midnight and all. And yes The Captains death is realistic to his character, and it's not That bad, but it's just that it could be better. And yeah, the second-hand embarresment is just so great as well.
I do very much suggest that you finish the UK Ghosts, as it really has some super heartfelt episodes and scenes. Also, Robin is one of my fave characters, and I feel it is definetly something Thor is missing. Out of the group, Robin is actually the wisest, having been around the longest, and often gives answers and advice to characters having issues. Take one episode when one of the ghosts get "sucked off", Robin is the one to help with the loss, explaining his experiences losing so many over the thousands of years. It's something Thor doesn't really seem to have, he just seems brute and stupid, but Robin just has issues with speak (except French, he speaks that very well XD) But, actually, looking at the characters, alot of them do change and develop through the series', which I do enjoy, they come along way and find that it is no longer a chore/curse I am sad it ended, but it did have a really nice and bitter sweet final. Something I do really like when shows do.
I love the episode where all the uk ghost help tell a story but their almost all unreliable narrators really good plot there, I also like the us version too tho I think they both have merits :)
Possibly it's because I prefer witty humor to slapstick, I am a fan of the UK Ghosts. I also saw it first. I feel like the American Ghosts either feel like extreme caricatures of their respective times and cultures, or they don't feel like they are from that era at all. There was one episode where Sass stated that he died at a Halloween party and that this was a costume, only to reveal that was sarcasm. I was thinking it made a lot more sense to his character. I also feel like the funniest moments in the American version are when they pulled jokes directly from the UK version. I will say that Jay is an amazing addition to the show. He is by far my favorite part of the American version.
Something to note: English country houses vary in size depending on heritage, time period, wealth, funding, etc. West Horsley Place (Button House) is on the smaller size compared to similar grand estates such as Calke Abbey and Packwood House (estates owned by lower nobility); this is another reason why the concept just does not translate well for American television in my opinion: the whole idea of nobility and country estates and extreme class divisions (due to that), historical landmarks and its ghost stories, etc. is such a BRITISH concept - I have been to pubs that are older than America; my family's house is older than America by roughly thirty years (although it has been numerously reinvented)! It makes sense that these ghosts would be stuck in their ways and bicker and be inconsiderate (horrible to an extent) people; it makes no sense to me that the American ghosts have literally no distinction of society, class, politics despite a few jokes about living in different time periods. I mean, why would a ghost from The American Revolutionary War be so openly flamboyant and "feminine" (according to the ideals of his society) with barely any shame or firm religious beliefs? I know you saw this as a negative but the ghosts need to be on some level unlikable to help create conflict and later relatability/comfort...I would rather they be horrible, dramatic, petty, selfish (dead) people than the sanatisted, friendly, harmless ghosts we see in the US adaptation. Sorry for the rant, I just needed to get it out of my system (although I have more to say on the matter; both good and bad, if you or anyone else would like to discuss the topic further!)
@@lailadobb9221 I'm also perplexed how would teaching/learning work for an entity without brains, but I might be overthinking it. Also forgot about the viking dude. how on earth can he speak English?
@@UtamagUta I mean in the BBC Ghosts' "Robin" teaches Humphrey French; additionally, we need brains to function; to walk, to talk, to think, etc. We know they don't have human limbs anymore (Captain never being able to beat his record), but they must have some sort of Ghost brain, perhaps? Also about the Viking guy, it depends on when he died and in what location, for there is evidence to suggest that some Vikings would have been able to speak English (albeit Old English). However, the (one of the) only groups of Vikings to arrive at "North America"/Native American Tribes was Leif Eriksson (Second Son of Erik The Red; founder of Greenland) and his tribe in Greenland, yet only for the winter in 1002 before returning to Greenland...so its highly unlikely that the Viking even died in America! He was struck by lightning in 1007 and from a little bit of research (Vikings are not my area of expertise; The Great Witch Hunts (1480 - 1750) are.), the only Nordic settlers in North America (particularly the Atlantic Coast and Maine) were spairse and barely lasted beyond the mid-11th century. The only Norse group of any confirmed, archived relevance towards settlement was 'L'Anse aux Meadows' IN CANADA! I don't know why I am so fixatedly annoyed by this awful disgrace of a sitcom/remake (similar in vain of the new "Horrible Histories').
@@lailadobb9221 The show points out it’s new historical information that Thorfinn the Viking made it to where the show takes place. One of the living states outright “there were no Vikings here.” It’s a plot point when they find his bones that it would be a major historical discovery. No matter what there would be a language issue. Anyone pre-1500ish would be pretty hard to understand, even if they were speaking a form of English. So maybe they just learned from listening to people for a very long time.
As usual, the Americans are better at the bigger picture in a story while the British are better at the small things. In my opinion, the small things are much more important as almost anyone is respectable when it comes to bigger picture stuff. Very few people can pull off smaller picture stuff and it really is incredibly satisfying to watch a show filled with the little stuff since everything is just big stuff all the time non-stop.
Both versions are really fun. Honestly I’d love to see a version of this show from another country as well. Different countries have different historical characters leading to an interesting cast of ghosts. I really grew to love Robin in the UK version. The episode with the bear was him at his absolute best. His deepness when Mary left was sweet as well. I also love the hidden affair in the UK version. In the US version episodes that focus on Pete are guaranteed to hit the feels and Thorfin is the best character.
As I was watching the UK version I started to think of that as well. In Latvian version there would definitely be ww1 soldier rather than ww2. And probably 13th century pagan/later middle age religious merchant duo who would bicker all the time. Any of the poets/writers that made up the first national awakening, like they all are really important and really well known here. Definitely some somple peasant ghost and done politically oppressed one. Someone who died drunk driving as well, since that's a huuuge problem here
A lot of the differences you talk about are differences between British and US comedy. "We are all in the shit together" is the core of most British comedy. Comedy in the UK is rarely positive or upbeat, which is totally different to comedy in the US. Ap The fact that the US series B&B succeeds whereas the UK series hotel fails just highlights this. Ditto characters. Often negative in British comedy - and British comedy LOVES argument and disagreement. Also, fewer episodes in the UK series, so not enough time for too much set up. No time to worry too much about the "livings" background - get on with the ghost bit. As for small rooms, have you visited a British stately home? Apart from large reception rooms, dining rooms - often the ones on the ground floor and often for show - most rooms are relatively small. So a bedroom will often have a separate dressing room, etc. - a suite of small interconnected rooms. Why? Probably heating-related - smaller rooms are easier to heat. But the UK series reflects this very well. British stately homes are often remarkably pokey (and easy to get lost in) inside.
the us version is definitely my favorite show rn, i kept getting ads for it on instagram for MONTHS and i refused to give in bc im stubborn, but i ended up seeing a clip of a scene with pete seeing his daughter and grandson visit the mansion and it made me CRY so i caved lol :/ great video! might watch the uk version while i wait for the rest of season 4 to premiere
@@luvlyangel22 I reckon it's a cultural thing (assuming you're from the us or nearabouts) because I really struggled to get through the first episode of the us version, the bbc one fit my style of humour much better
This is a fun comparative analysis - thanks for sharing! I've watched both shows and love them both in many of the ways you describe. One big difference in the two shows is that the UK show is filmed in a real house - West Horsley Place, in Surrey. As in the show, it's a 15th century structure with a 17th century facade attached to it. The show was filmed entirely on site - interiors and exteriors. That's probably why it felt claustrophobic and dark, because it's a really old house, not a big, spacious soundstage as in the US Ghosts. The exterior of the US Ghosts mansion is in Canada, and the show's filmed in studio in Montreal. As far as which show I like better, that is so hard to say! They're both great in their own ways. I do feel that the UK version is more clever, but the US version is a little more lighthearted, so I guess whatever you're in the mood for!
Your point about the tone with which each version ends is part of why I think the UK one works a lot better. The 'this is shit but we're all stuck together' circumstance is a fantastic starting off point to force these very different characters into situations where they have to understand one another and really grow to care about each other (plus the frustration of it all is something we as an audience can find funny). The US characters, while maybe more varied in terms of age and time period, felt a lot more one-note in terms of character. It doesn't feel like these characters see much significant growth across the seasons, whereas you see such stark difference in Julian or Fanny (for example) by the end of the show, because of where they started off. The comparison you make about the B plot of the episode in the UK, saying it was about minor frustration, it was actually Fanny coming to terms with and speaking out about the fact she was killed by her husband pushing her out of the window, like Julian did to Alison. What starts off as seemingly unconnected to the main episode's plot ties together really nicely by the end, and it's this sort of writing that I really enjoy in the UK version. I get the point about the diversity of age ranges and time periods in the US version, but it's important to note that the cast of the UK version created, wrote, and always planned to star in the show, so they had to create characters that fit with what they are able to play (age-wise).
UK. Kitty and Mary were my favorites. And The Captain and Kitty's afternoon together was one of the best bits! Singing about clouds, then skipping away...loved it. The interactions between the UK ghosts feels more genuine and you believe they've been stuck together for ages. The US ghosts don't give off that same vibe - it's like they're meeting each other when they meet Sam.
This surprised me. As a Brit, I watched the whole of UK Ghosts (one of my favourite shows ever) before the US one, and with the US one, I genuinely hated the first few episodes so much I stopped watching. I think there's bias, of course, I'd seen the UK one, so I was seeing a copy of my fav show, but I think the same would have happened had I never watched the UK show. The issues I had with the US one are simple. Subtlety and variation. In the UK, the Ghosts all kind of hate each other, and their antics constantly mess up Allison and Mikes lives in a chaotic British manor, even the ones trying to help. However, slowly, we see them caring for each other and the whole group become a family. It feels more real, as anyone forced in Lockdown with the family can tell you, you all hate each other, but still care for one another. The cynicism makes the emotional, softer moments hit harder. The US one, however, seemed to have everybody be cool with each other and the couple fairly quickly, which takes away the development like that, and the show removes almost any subtleties. Each ghost just says their key backstory immediately, and we don't learn slowly and get to know them, we just are told everything straight up. The relentlessly positive attitude makes less interesting and has less subtle character work, which is meant to be where the comedy comes from. The other thing is variation. The US Ghosts had a chance to do something unique, tapping into the pool of their own history to make their ghosts. What they instead did was mostly copy the UK ghosts, who were all a good reflection of the Unique UK history, allowing different time periods to interact and learn from each other with different traditions and opinions (a caveman VS Victorian noble VS Witch hunt era). The US one makes two mistakes. First, most of the ghosts are from the 1900s. Whilst that time changes a lot, not as much as, say 1400s to 2010s, theres less unique outlooks. Second, it seems more focused on parallels to UK rather than making unique ghosts. You could have had, rather than another scout ghost, a Spanish sailor who was one of the first to enter the US, then died when he was shot with an arrow by a Native American (giving a rivarly with the other Native American, who could now be from like the 1000s, seeing his land be slowly overtaken, making him more bitter). Rather then another upper class Victorian lady, make a Pilgrim who is heavily Puritan. Rather than another modern day scumbag, have a Charming Wild West Outlaw who died in a gunfight (though in a more embarrassing way he would be willing to admit) and have the most recently dead one by from the 60s to add variation from both the UK and each other. My point is, too many ghosts from the US were to similar to the UK, and didn't take advantage of their own history. The other US issue I had was that I didn't think it was funny, but thats a me thing.
Same! Absolutely hated the US version. The characters are annoying and not funny, especially the captain, the gay jokes were obvious and cheap, almost offensive
They can't have a cowboy because the cowboys are nowhere near that area. They in the New York Canada area. It would have to make some sort of sense because cowboys are a western USA mexico thing. The Spanish did not land that north. Maybe a French fur trader? As for the puritan.....let's just say you are gonna want to watch the new season.
I watched the first season or two of the UK version before the US version came out. I have seen all of the US version. I love both. They are two different versions of the same prompt. Like two artists commissioned to paint the same subject. Many elements will be the same but yet different takes on the same subject.
Its interesting that you don't mention the castings previous role with most of them coming from cbbc's horrible histories idk but I feel that was a major boost in its viewership.
I'll be honest, nobody in America knows what "horrible histories" is. I had never heard of the show until after I got a bunch of comments on this review mentioning it. It never aired on TV, and I don't think it's legally streaming anywhere for us.
@@thejudgmentalcritter6584Horrible histories retells historical events In a comedic and slightly dark way. It is a show designed for both kids and adults. It's really fun, and very popular in the UK, most people in the uk know the themesong. If you can eventually find it whether on a streaming service or clips on TH-cam, I highly recomend it.
@@thejudgmentalcritter6584Horrible histories retells historical events In a comedic and slightly dark way. It is a show designed for both kids and adults. It's really fun, and very popular in the UK, most people in the uk know the themesong. If you can eventually find it whether on a streaming service or clips on TH-cam from the official horrible histories channel, I highly recomend it.
Yes there is a lot of good will towards them that definitely helps give their projects/shows that initial run. Tbh, I loved Yonderland but it was so weird that I often found myself wondering who was watching it that it managed to get three series 😂 HH followers probably made up a big %
@@thejudgmentalcritter6584 I don’t know what it would be like for someone from another part of the world to start watching it by themselves now (would be interesting to hear actually) but in the countries it was airing in back in the day it was a cultural phenomenon. It was a kids show but everyone was watching it. College students, adults- and not just like moms who saw it on in the background. I remember discussing it with friends of my parents who didn’t have kids themselves 😂 and my dad was never the type who would be interested in watching disney films and stuff with us but he still quotes HH to this day (literally yesterday) 😆
What a lot of people don't seem to know is that Simon Farnaby and Mathew Baynton, who play cast members in the UK version are executive producers for the U.S. version.
All main six cast members (Mathew Baynton, Simon Farnaby, Martha Howe-Douglas, Laurence Rickard, Ben Willbond, and Jim Howick) are all executive producers for the US version as well.
US for two particular reasons. 1. Jay is actually involved with the ghosts! Sure he can’t see them but he still tries to talk to them the best he can and be involved in stuff. Plus he and Pete are besties. 2. Nancy. Nancy is a basement ghost that’s actually involved with the cast time to time she’s a pretty fun character.
I still prefer Jay over Mike because he's funnier and seemingly has better chemistry with the other characters, then again maybe I haven't watched enough of UK ghosts for Mike to fully "click" to me.
I honestly can't stand Mike and just lowers the whole likeability of the show for me. He's an extremely stupid person that's to exaggerated even for fiction.
I personally preferred the UK version’s wit. Though I am British. Whilst I liked the conflict of the American version, everything you found largely positive, I found largely negative. Sam I found to be irritating and unbelievable whilst Alison I found to be more relatable and was more invested in. Found Mike and Jay to be equally annoying so meh. Honestly knowing that they only exist to be a ‘what ghost thing?’ Character sucked, I just find it to be an overused ploy in tv. I found the UK version to have better build up and it made me personally laugh harder. I also quite enjoyed Alison’s accident because it was more understandable. She leant out a window and couldn’t see Julian behind her or shoving her out. I guess Sam just missed the large vase that made a noise when it dropped? Tbf the mansion thing seems like a cultural difference, the uk is very old there are plenty of mansions with tight halls and smaller rooms. I felt quite split on the ghosts, I preferred the Captain, Robin Julian and Kitty but I did like Flower and Alberta. I also felt the use of a colonial captain was weird, there being a Native American present and yet that obvious conflict isn’t there seems off. I really liked your take and understood completely but I’m UK all the way
@@MsKaz1000 Sorry I meant that the obvious conflict would be the captain being racist. Like he was a confederate captain, wouldn't he viscerally hate native americans? I could just not be clued up enough.
"Theyre almost all nobles of some sort". Boy scout, MP, peasant, soldier, poet, caveman, cellar ghosts.... Um... Do americans just think anyone with a british accent is a 'noble'?
As a Dutch half-Irishman (just zo yous know I don't have any sort of stake in this) I watched UK Ghosts with my family. Absolutely loved it! The ending could have been better, but it was great! We tried watching the US version, but we couldn't even get through five minutes. The main appeal of UK Ghosts is that we learn more about the characters as the show goes on. Some things aren't even revealed until some of the last episodes! But the US version just.... Tells you EVERYTHING in the first five minutes! The key difference is show versus tell. UK Ghosts SHOWS. The US version TELLS. It just degrades the story and make everything feel clunky and forced. I don't like it at all.
After watching the video I've noticed that a lot of the things you didn't like about the UK Ghosts are exactly some of the things I preferred. Like for instance a large part of the UK Ghosts is figuring out how to live together (which is why that annoyance is an important plot for the first episode. It shows the ghost are actually not that scary and most importantly that they have issues WITHOUT ALLISON THERE. Such things just couldn't be in anything but the very first episode). It just makes more sense to me that that's something which would take time. Which the UK Ghosts portray very well. I also prefer Robin. You're not really supposed to laugh every time he speaks caveman like, only occasionally. He's actually really smart, a very good chess player. But that's countered with him getting easily distracted by things (like bunnies or spiders, which makes sense), not quite understanding such modern things, and him saying things in caveman talk. Things like dadonka dadonka when moving a chess piece. He, and the other UK ghosts, have lots of secretly hidden layers to their character you just won't see in the first couple episodes. Also, the mansions rooms and hallways were quite regularly sized. I live in a fairly modern house compared to some (1891, the town up the road has houses from before the Netherlands existed as a country. AKA, the 1600dreds) and they've got slightly bigger hallways there. I don't know about American houses, but the size makes sense. So I don't know whether the it comes down to culture, which we've seen first or simple presence. But these are a couple reasons why I like the UK Ghosts. I'll still probably watch some more US Ghosts though, just to check if it's truly as bad as I dread it may be (usually those shows are way worse and sometimes even ruin the original). Hopefully not.
@@BasicallyBaconSandvichIVthe more deep you get into the US version of Ghosts a bunch of new cans of worms open up. I genuinely think it’s hilarious. My husband and I watch it every time it airs on television. I know how they basically reveal everything (like how they passed away) in the first episode but the more you go into the show it reveals a lot about their past.
17:35 Having a ‘side plot’ at the start of the first season is arguably far better than having it in a mid-season episode as it is a great way to almost show the monotonous life of the ghosts, and how boring being a ghost actually is. For me I just find the begrudging, reluctant tone way more convincing and realistic in the UK one.
Ive watched the US version and I absolutely love it. The hardest part about enjoying it though was that I couldn't find people talking about it online who weren't bashing it for not being the UK version. So finally having my views validated is like, awesome. It's a fun show and I'm really excited for it to continue.
That’s super valid. I personally prefer the UK version, but just because it’s the only one I’ve seen and I grew up with the cast. People will always tend to like what they’re used to, it’s a big reason why there would be massive arguments about dub vs. sub in Anime. But I think people definitely have a tendency to really devalue US versions of UK TV. There is a sort of “air of superiority” around it, which sucks, because from what Critter said in her video, I can totally get why someone would prefer the U.S. version, especially if it’s the one they first watched!
Same here. I love Ghosts US and watch it every week. In my opinion, its a comedy how comedies should be. I tried watching Ghosts UK, in hope that I would have 2 Ghosts shows to love but I found Ghosts UK to be slow moving, boring, and dreary. No offense to those who like it, just a difference in taste and culture. But my vote definitely goes to Ghosts US. Love the show.
I was pleasantly surprised by the American version of Ghosts. They have taken things to a different place (with the possession storylines, for example) and the cast is just amazing. I like to watch both
As someone who’s only seen the Uk ghosts I do like the concepts they couldn’t do here such as the indigenous American and the hippie since those would only be available in America and I like there creativity
Swinging London was almost a decade before the Summer of Love in the US. Led Zeppelin, The Beatles and The Who with their drugs and groupies would disagree that there were no hippies here, also the UK had indigenous people before we arrived, the original Bretons and Picts and before that the ancient Druids.
I love how the cast of the British one also play the plague ghosts. Very theatrical tradition. Most of the cast also appeared in the TV show for kids called Horrible Histories.
The UK cast also wrote ghosts, it was their concept. But it definitely comes down to sense of humour. I loved the UK version but couldn’t get on with the US version at all, it was all to upbeat and bubbly, for a show that is about a woman who al ostensibly dies and can then see ghosts, it was all a bit much for me personally.
Ok so not seen either of theses show so bear with me. The mansion size thing you mentioned, ya even the uk old timey large estates tend not to be that big. Feel from how you described it the UK verion was first and that gives the US version time to rewrite and improve on somethings, with the benefit of hindsight. The lighting and colours again i feel come done to culture. American tv has definitely come off as more " look how big, bright and colorful everything is!". Feel like the ghosts directly trying to kill her and touching her may have been apart of the reason she sees them, but for american verion they saw this was not really important long term and went their own way. The part where UK verion seems to be made up of small annoyances and the US is very " well lets go with it" seems very UK attitude vs US attitude. Infact i feel if you had not mentioned which was which version i would have easily guessed it. Going to say though, i have not seen either and I'm probably not going to. Neither sounds like my thing. But thanks for sharing. It was interesting to here about the 2's differences and similarities.
I love both UK and US versions. They are both good in their own way. You just have to get past the first few episodes of the US one, as it’s super speed repeats through the UK premise.
not british, but i genuinely adore the uk version and cannot STAND the american one… it feels like it’s trying too hard to be sincere, which takes away from the humour of the uk version. i could go on forever with my issues with what you said in this video, but obviously - to each their own, and i’ll just leave it by saying whilst i have rewatched the uk version 3 times, i found the us one absolutely unbearable.
I tried the US version of ghosts, but it just didn't feel the same. I sort of grew up with six of the actors that play the main ghosts and honestly think that they are hilarious. I actually really enjoyed watching the characters develop and learn how to get along and learning their back stories and why they are the way they are.
I definitely am in the boat of preferring the UK version over the US one. I find british comedy more entertaining, personally and love the cast of the show. Their previous big show was Horrible Histories, which I love a lot too. I personally find the US one to be kind of annoying at times, honestly.
Believe it or not, British historical buildings aren't actually that roomy inside compared to how large they look outside - and that has a lot to do with large open spaces are harder to keep heated. And also the walls are usually at least a foot thick.
I love that you did this comparison I have not seen the British version but I am a fan of the American version so seeing this is really great thank you so much 😊
I’m an American and I MUCH prefer the English version. It is the original and the American version wouldn’t exist if the English version didn’t. I don’t know how it took you so long to see the English version. I saw it, in the US, long before the American version even was a thought. The English version is much more poignant; you really care about the characters and are invested in their happiness. I’ve seen a couple of episodes of the American version and it just seems like a caricature of the original version. And I love the ending of the English version; instead of beating a dead horse, they brought the show to a satisfying conclusion before it started to get stale.
Oh, and by the way, the English version was filmed in a REAL mansion, so that’s why some of the scenes seemed a bit closed in. You can go on TH-cam and get a tour of the mansion they used. I’ll bet the American version uses film sets.
@@thejudgmentalcritter6584 I saw it on Daily Motion originally. Later I bought it on Amazon Prime because I love it so much, I go back and watch it again and again.
2 things I really loved, First your icon, the little critter is adorable. 2nd I love how each time thor gave an example it got more brutal and disturbing each time
I vastly prefer the UK version. I've even bought the entire show off of Amazon. The UK show has this mixture of comedy and bittersweet moments. And I really like that. The ghosts can be funny, but they can also make you cry. I'd say it also sounds like you didn't watch even Season 1 of Ghosts all the way through. 1) Humphrey (the headless ghost is far more important to the series, though he's also forgotten at times. Meanwhile Crash in the US series disappears fro two seasons, pops up, and as far as I'm aware has disappeared again. 2) Thomas didn't die in 1780 whatever. He died in 1820 something (24 maybe?) . While I do find him stalker-y, I also think he's a good example of a Romantic artist. Their passions ruled them, and that was not always a good thing. I could go on for quite a while about how the American version is disappointing and inferior. I think I'll just sum it up as they turned the show into ship bait where everyone is dating everyone else suddenly despite having been trapped in the house together for decades, and the writers don't know what to do with them now they've played out all the romantic tension. Meanwhile the British version has no one dating anyone. And while there are hits something might have happened here or there in the past, for the most part they're not interested. They're Friends, not lovers. Well, friends on a good day. They're also an example of Sartre's No Exit. The one thing I did like in the US show as having Sam's fall be an accident rather than an attempted murder by ghosts. That was bad. I also like how Jay attempts to play D&D with the ghosts, and how he and Pete have a bit of a friendship as well, though Sam has to be a go between. Mike never really gets close to any of the ghosts. Anyway, the US version has awful writing and no heart despite its many sexual relationships. The UK version is the much better product in terms of its emotional core. Ghosts will make you both laugh and cry. And I love that.
I’ve only watched a few episodes of the us version didn’t like it at all. The Allison and Mike are far superior to the us version couple. I also like the ghosts better. The acting and comedy in us version isn’t as funny. Us version just feels like they took the uk show and put in the typical us boring network sitcom format.
@@sowhatchajen2846 Re: US sitcom format. I think its format does borrow from that at times, but that's not actually what they're doing (or if they were, they're doing an awful job of it. I mentioned the romantic relationships as a problem. Part of it is that they don't know how to do a network Slow Burn. In the show Lois and Clark, and old network Superman show, where the entire audience know Lois and Clark are eventually going to get together, I think they kept that bait going for 3 years, maybe 4 before they finally got together. In the US ghosts, probably their most successful relationship was the Revolutionary soldier having a long-term infatuation with the Red Coat officer that he accidentally killed. The story was introduced with the premise that there's 3 British Red Coats who live in a shed on the property, and that every year, he comes to the house with his men and has an argument with Issac (the Revolutionary) over ownership of the house, I think it is. They have a huge argument. And then he leaves and comes back again next year. And when you find out that Issac acutlaly likes him, it's kind of cute. And Sam and Jay push to move things forward so that they aren't just arguing with each other once a year, and could maybe start courting. And as much as I find the romances in the show irritating, this was the first one, and seemed to be well set up in the characters' backstories, so I was willing to go along with it and see where it went. And then it basically did a speed run of multiple dating obstacles that should have had legitimate conversation and growing together as a couple, as well as coming up with quite a few ridiculous ones. Like, there actually was a friends stage before a courting stage and that seemed like it should have lasted longer considering Issac was in denial about being gay in the first place. But even after that, there should have been more talk. Various philsophical differences to get over. Various past mistakes to get over. Basically there was lots of grist for the mill that should have made the relationship take time. And the show just would not slow down the romance. To be clear, I can get irritated with shows that move too slowly on their romantic plots, but this was ridiculously fast And again, I actually liked this pairing and thought it was interesting and promising. If they'd been running the show like a proper network show, they would have stretched things out, much longer. And heck, the arguments between the two would have been of historical, but we're going to totally ignore that they have massively opposing political views to the point that one of them shot the other. That doesn't need to be worked through at all and will take no time. I'd say that maybe it was a speedrun because the writers thought gay romance was icky, but the straight couples got worse treatment (less development, a faster speedrun, and a certain blandness to the whole story just so everyone could be having sex with everyone else. It was very disappointing.
@@jenniferhanses I wasn’t expecting such a detailed response. I love UK ghosts so much. I bought season 4 on dvd when there was no way to get it here in us and I have a uk regions PlayStation to play uk dvds (I have several uk region dvds I think darkplace was the first). Luckily I was able to buy the 5th season digitally. I still may get a box set. All this to say I was also very disappointed in the US version too. I loved Julian’s arc by the end. The push was important to his story.
@@sowhatchajen2846 I still find Julian pushing Sam one of the worst things in the original Ghosts. And his apology for it in the 5th season was awful. The reason that it was awful was that it didn't matter what he did or what Alison did, I was never going to be happy with any of the resolution possibilities: 1) Alison leaves never to return. I don't want Alison to leave her friends. She's an orphan who has wanted a family her whole life and here they are. 2) He doesn't apologize and Alison stays. He tried to murder her. He's no longer an annoying relative, he's a danger to her and her family. She's a fool to stay. 3) He apologizes and she stays. There is no apology that is ever going to be good enough for "I wanted to murder you, I tried to go through with it, and I failed." There is nothing he can do to make up for it. She needs to leave. And again, I don't want her to leave. I really did not like Season 5. It has its high points. I liked the April Fools episode. But for me, but show ends with the whole cast dancing to Achy Breaky heart. The rest of it is just so bad. And pointless. Alison leaving does not fix her seeing ghosts. Alison leaving does not fix her and Mike having crap job prospects. Her best move was to live in the house and find a way to make money off of the land and house itself. Because working a minimum wage job for the rest of her life while being pestered by ghosts sounds way worse.
@@jenniferhanses They got a lot of money for the house and grounds, not just that bit for the golf course to be honest it would have been nice if they got shares in the hotel but the fact every Christmas they have their usual room may also have been written into the sales contract and the basement ghosts enjoying the lovely sauna room was sweet
Actually several of the Actors in the British "Ghosts" are also involved offstage in the US "Ghosts". They're executive producers. Also, I like both series.
I actually like both of them equally. The US version is more lighthearted, wholesome and feels like a classic sitcom, the UK version is more horror like and it’s more intense(more tragic, melodramatic and frustrating sometimes). This is what I’m looking forward to in adaptations, taking the same concept and telling original stories with it, complete with different emotions and atmospheres. Watch them depending on the mood, they cater to different cultural influences and it’s fun to point out the differences.
I'm British and have seen both shows. I found your opinions really interesting and maybe it does just come.down to culture? All of the UK show is filmed on location, the dull colours and somewhat small rooms compared to the occasional large ones is just how a lot of old locations are, and as for the more negative tone and cynical humor that seems to be out approach to things? I did enjoy the US one a lot more than I thought, my main problem with the US one was there are a lot more ghosts, and while that makes sense for longer seasons, the premise of the show is that they're stuck together and if there is a large crowd they'd just break off into small groups, like how Issac Hetty and Nigel form a group, or Sass and Trevor hang out often Also with the first UK episode, that sets the whole franchise up where the US had an extra 10 episode and the world pr built to really branch out from x I do agree the US is more cheerful but idk I find US shows more cheerful overall x with great shows ans again really enjoyed this video of your views x
Thanks to this video and your non biased opinions i decided to give ghosts us and i really like it so thank you I will say i still prefer the uk ghosts intro
The main reason the UK Ghosts are mostly the same age isbecause most of the UK actors have been collaborating for decades and so many of their projects are made around them and not them having to fit into a role. A contributing factor to most of them being nobles is that group’s most famous collaboration is from the award winning seasons of the UK children’s Comedy Edutainment series Horrible Histories and a lot of the characters are references to archetypes each actor often played in that show. Notable Horrible points of history that can be quickly explained to kids tend to involve either nobles, the poorest society or a generalisation of the whole culture so ghosts characters being spiritual successors carry that through. (Because horrible histories had a lot of parodies some modern stuff seeped in but the references are very late 2000s British so it probably doesn’t transfer to America as well. There was a point where almost every British child knew at least one HH song by heart. A lot of British people describe Ghosts as “the show with the Horrible Histories cast” even though there have been other cast)
If you did like the UK version, which I also haven't seen, you might enjoy Yonderland, one of those kids shows that's funny for adults too. So much of the cast stick together for other projects, like You, Me and the Apocalypse.
The US market one works for the US audience. It's a bit too peppy and nice for UK audiences: we like pathos, schadenfreude, and depth. The US one works but it does feel very gee, swell, oh honey baby to us.
I like the ghosts in both versions, and this is really a show where localisation makes sense, but I like the couple in the UK version more and I came in from Horrible History so I prefer the UK version. I do appreciate the US version uses the premise to tell a story unique to that setting though. It’s a very exportable premise.
![[TH] 2024 PMGC League | Survival Stage วันที่ 1 | PUBG MOBILE Global Championship](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FVFT-PFwU80/mqdefault.jpg)
As someone who’s only seen the UK version, I really love the contradictions each character has. I like the captain’s stern demeanour and his soft interior, or Julian’s selfishness mixed with a need to be liked. Robin especially (my favourite character) is wise and intelligent and eager to learn, but he’s also still dumb and easy to scare (even though objectively he is the second scariest ghost).
Who's the scariest, the singing plague girl?
@@srstacy Thomas Thorne, the creepy poet with no respect for boundaries (emotional or physical), and has literal withdrawal symptoms when he doesn’t heavy-handedly flirt with Alison, who is a married woman who has told him repeatedly over and over again that she is not interested in him that way and that she doesn’t want him acting like that.
Don’t bother with the American version and I say that as an American. It’s okay I guess but not nearly as good as the UK version.
I agree with this perfectly. The US version everyone is far less of a character. They are more stereotypes that are too human. Takes away from the comedy and more into a drama. The jokes also don't land as well
It is on in during the strike the BBC Ghost watch some didn't like some of actors on it
The take away here is that the American version is designed to appeal to the American brighter, happier, more obvious sense of humour where the British one is designed to appeal to the British, downbeat, gloomier, more subtle sense of humour. Horses for courses.
I watched both, and absolutely preferred the UK. It's just my opinion, but I think the USA versions of shows having like 20 episodes a season weirdly makes the writing shallower?
When you have to write 20 episodes of a sitcom, you basically need to write a bunch of big personalities, establish them early on, and then have 20 episodes worth of changing situations. So the characters can't ever really change or develop, because the moment they did can be lost in the filler. Whereas in the UK version, the lower episode count means they could do some really major changes and trust it wouldn't be lost.
(Like, in the USA version, they were so scared of disturbing the status quo that they changed Marys "death" into Flower getting trapped in the well for a few episodes so everyone thought she was dead. All the mourning was undercut by jokes, and the audience had all of ten seconds thinking something major had finally happened. It really ruined what was genuinely a great plot in Ghosts UK)
@@ScouseJazmin The US one is just much more modern which appeals to me more tbh
I like US more bc I just prefer the happier brighter version
@@braincell4536 what do you mean "more modern"? The British one came out in 2019 it is modern
@@FirePercy Maybe he meant it look more modern with the brighter and more saturated colour? Or the US ghost characters are more modern as opposed to the UK ghost consisting of mostly aristocrat
"This is shit and we're all stuck together in this shit" is probably the best way to describe people's attitude to everything in the UK lol
It is also the fundamental core trope behind almost all British comedy!
@johnlbirch Different lives create different art. The Class system is a vast thing in British thought, America prefers to see itself as class free. Thus the tiny class difference between Lister and Rimmer on RED DWARF generates vast amounts of comedy. It is differences in up bringing and values that generates the comedy between Thurston Howl and Gilligan. And you need a class difference as vast as that between a working class man and an old money multimillionaire to run class comedy in America.
The two shows have to take different paths in order to function at all.
@@poseidonskidfromfrance Don't be a creepy little snob. Just because you were taught to hate Americans and Jews doesn't make bigotry virtuous or wise. Different doesn't equal inferior.
And everything in American comedy is like happy days. Hahahaha ooohhhhh hahahaha. 1 dimension. No depth. Slapstick shit
😂
My dad had a saying " I'm always in the shit, it's the depth that varies"
16:50 To be fair, that's kinda the point. Julian is a Conservative MP from the late 80s-early 90s. They arent really known to be good people here in the UK
Julian is a real sweetie compared to Alan B'Stard (played by Rik Mayall) from late 80s / early 90s satirical sitcom The New Statesman.
Both are parodies of a particular breed of Thatcherite MP who rose to prominence during the 80s - i.e brash, amoral, corrupt, impulsive and prone to infidelity and sexual misadventure.
Mehh.. most politicians are, even to this very day, all across the world.
Neither are labour mps tbf
@@cashkitty3472 True but not as bad as the Thatcher-era Tories
They are all cut from the same cloth and they all have awful inexcusable behaviors, picking sides and saying "this side good, this side bad" is just disingenuous.
The thing I like about the UK version is something you saw as a negative. Yes, the ghosts quarrel about little things but if you have an eternity with each other, it's the little things that will start to become the elephant in the room.
like how when your dating, you dont know that your partner really likes to eat garlic bread in bed, and after your married you start waking up with crumbs in your nooks and crannies
The US version has the quarrelling as well, but it is much more toned down, and not their primary characteristics. Each ghost has elements to grow with and you spend a lot of time rooting for them, as they are just more likable than anyone on the UK version. And Mike specifically on the UK version was terrible, just an unlikable idiot, Jay is so much more upbeat and supportive and a much better character.
@@darthwingnut464 you just explained why the uk is better, why should you root for them, its a comedy, not a drama, rooting for there growth takes away from the humour, americans just dont understand how to do humour right
@@bigfrankfraser1391 Again, I generally prefer the UK versions of almost everything. This is one where the Brits got it wrong, which is a shame.
@@darthwingnut464 I find the UK versions endearing in their imperfections and general negative traits. It makes any time that they genuinely do something redeemable so much stronger
I do like the American version but the characters can be a bit too bouncy and upbeat for my tastes. I think that the two leads are comparably weak.
Having said that however, I think that is what makes the US remake worthwhile. If it tried to hit all the same notes, it would be a copy for the sake of being a copy. Instead, it took what was an excellent premise and tailored it to an American audience. Now everyone wins. I'm also sure that there will be proponents of both from opposite sides of the pond. As it is,, everyone wins and neither detracts from the other.; pick your poison.
You complain that the mansion characters in the UK are mostly aristocrats. That would be because in the UK only aristocrats or their servants would have lived in mansions. So it makes a lot more sense than a bunch of random characters.
That's why they used really old and really new ghosts, not a bunch of samey types
Pat isn't an aristocrat, neither is Mary or the Captain or Robin!
@@robinhickman6170Robin died way before the word aristocrat existed
@@fiery114 The mansion was built on his burial site, same as the plague pit guys in the cellar.
In the US version, the only full-time resident of the house was Hetty, bc iirc Woodstone wasn't built before her time, whereas Button House was originally Tudor and has been passed down through way more generations. It started as a Tudor building of the Bones, hence why Humphrey lived there. Then supposedly Mary was a servant there in the Stuart era, and then Kitty was adopted by the Higham family, who led to Isabelle in the Regency. Thomas is clearly a member of society, so yeah he and his cousin were middle-upper class. Eventually the line goes to Fanny and George. A grand total of 4 residents of Button House ghosts were nobility/aristocracy (3 more than the American version, although Trevor and Isaac were probably middle-upper class based on their lifestyle/status/income). You could argue that the Captain and Julian were also from upper class backgrounds and got status through nepotism or buying their way in or reputation, but i wouldn't call them strictly aristocracy, same as their American counterparts.
I guess in terms of quantity, the British version does technically have more, but I don't think it really impacts the story? Humphrey is the most humble and down-to-earth of them all, and Kitty is incredibly sweet, if ditzy. Fanny and Hetty are ofc very snobby, which is part of their character, but other than than, I don't think class or status really makes that much difference and still makes sense for the characters in terms of timeline, though I do understand the complaint in a way.
My favorite part of the UK version is the basement ghosts are played by the same actors
Yes that's great!
My family and I used to do "spot the actor" and see which main character was paired up with which ghost!
Favourite*
American spelling is favorite
@@dancingnature Americans spell wrong.
English is English. Not American.
I'm not picking a side in your Anglosphere arguments, but I justed wanted to point out that
English is just mangeled Dutch with nearly half French words and a small bit of Norse words and not even a smidge of anything Celtic.
English is an hilarious abomination of a language with hardly a rule to it due to it's mangled state.
That’s genuinely what old mansions and stately home look like, they’re not McMansions. It’s filmed in a real one in the UK
Lol what is a "McMansion"?
It's a joke because alot of Americans are morbidly obese and love mcdonalds
@@thejudgmentalcritter6584 McMansion is a pejorative term for a large, "mass-produced" house in a suburban community that is marketed to the upper middle class in developed countries. I'd recommend having a look at the blog mcmansionhell by Kate Wagner
Basically a fake mansion @thejudgmentalcritter6584
@@thejudgmentalcritter6584 LOL work it out or look it up FFS....
The UK cast before Ghosts worked on a sketch comedy show called Horrible Histories which had a lot of broad comedy bits. One of their regular bits was called "Stupid Deaths" which was parodied in one of the US episodes.
In which one of the original Horrible Histories cast played an actor portraying Pete - it was meta and wonderful!
@@lenawagenfuehr53 Most of the writers from Ghosts UK were in Horrible Histories. Julian was Death, Robin was a King. Thomas and has played Shakespeare in a film the cast wrote called Bill. Lady Fanny played Boudica celt warrior that took on the Roman army. Pat played King George IV and Mozart.
I loved Horrible Histories as a kid!
It made watching Ghosts even more awesome!
(And that's with only half remembering it.)
i think this is why it worked so well. we all already saw them take on these roles, so we knew that they’d be perfect
Yeah, also explains why there wasn’t much variation in the ages of the UK ghosts. The cast was already a team who had worked together for years and were of a similar age (Monty Python would be the best comparison)
British comedies don't have the need for characters to be likeable as a basic premise. The UK version works like Sartre's "Huis Clos" - they're housemates rather than friends, and they've been trapped together for centuries. It's because of their bad character traits that they can't move on, and they only start to evolve because they are interacting with a living person and change is introduced into the house. That allows for some really poignant moments.
The US version is ok, but the idea that one is better than the other is a really bad place to start from. They are just different and taste is subjective.
Thank u, Jillian pushing Alison is gonna make him unlikeable and that's ok, it's called character development, the ghosts learned to be a family because of Alison
I remember listening to a BTS video for a show and the director mentioned "letting the characters be ugly" which I think fits here, and I think can describe the differences between quite a few shows that have UK and US versions
The two ghosts we see move on after being stuck in the uk one both had to overcome some major personality issues or trauma in order to move on, Annie with learning to stand up to men, and mary talking about the witch trial.
I like both shows pretty much equally. The real difference between them is that they're both made for different audiences. British comedies tend to have a drier wit while American ones tend to favour broader comedy, and British characters often have rougher edges that would get rounded off in the States. They both work in their own ways.
And Robin is frikkin' adorable.
Yeah, the difference in humour is a big reason why I prefer the UK version. The US version is entertaining in its own way but the humour on a lot of American sitcoms, this one included, tends to be too "in your face" for my liking.
Please the English versions are much better.
What America did to the Inbetweeners was a fukin crime!
That pilot was garbage.
@@aesir26exactly.
American humour is just dumb.
British humour requires you to have a brain.
UK people arent funny at all
Great video, only thing to note is the part where you talked about how small the UK mansion is. The UK mansion is more of a stately home, and although still large in size, they tend to be surprisingly small in room size. This could be because these homes can be centuries old and the population has gradually gotten taller and larger over time, but these homes tend to have more rooms rather than less rooms for more floor space. Just a fun fact, doesn't detract from the video, just the more you know :)
I have a soft spot for Horrible Histories, and that cast is so funny together. So UK version wins for me.
That! The UK Ghost cast works as a team and that can´t be replicated.
Yes
Almost like a modern Monty Python, classics
Fr
I've never watched horrible histories but this cast does work so well together. I have tried to watch the US version but it just hasn't sucked me in the way the UK version did. They also ended the show on a high note and left me wanting more. I have also cried a few times when you find out how each ghost died.
the uk cast already acted together for decades and on lots of other shows, and their chemistry and friendship was just so much better and the uk one is clear because of this and the actors work better together
i feel like the UK's Alison is more appealing to me because of her reaction and irritation. Imagining having to live with ten other people all of a sudden, it would suck. I feel like it also makes her relationships with the ghosts more believable since she isn't instantly befriending them. Also, i prefer the UK acting wise.
Yes, the big arc of the UK one is Alison slowly growing to really care about and appreciate the ghosts over time.
Samantha is waaaaayyyyyy too accommodating with the ghosts. If she raises her kids that way they will be so obnoxious.
@@thistley_42 Like the family she always wanted growing up, Kitty was so the sister she always wanted and vice versa
sam is so annoying idc
I much more prefer Sam but prefer Mike
having seen both. I would describe the UK ghosts as being more like a family and the US ghosts as being friends that live together, which explains why in the US they are more friendly and upbeat with each other and the UK they argue more. The two joes have done an amazing job of making the show fit an American audience while keeping the core essence of the original UK show. UK and US humor doesn't always cross the pond well as US comedy generally tends to have more positivity. Alison and Mike felt like a typical UK couple with Mike not really forming a good relationship with the ghosts as he can't see them whereas Jay being into comics, sci-fi and movies allows him to be more interested in the ghosts and form a good relationship of sorts with some of the ghosts, which initially felt like a device they felt they needed to make Jay have relevance to the show because he can't see them, but the two joes have made it work well.
Makes sense that the UK version they act like family bc they're all distantly related! "You all come from me, and my sister." To quote Robin, lol. I rather prefer the UK version bc of the cast's chemistry, and I was raised on a lot of UK shows. Your opinion makes a lot of sense, very well articulated!
Actually Thomas died in in 1824. It is literally stated in the show. Specifically, Oct 10th 1824.
Also, the headless tudor noble has a name, he's Sir Humphrey Bone and he's my 2nd favourite character.
Hey thanks for that I've been watching all the episodes I can here in America and thanks for that info Thomas the great poet
Sir Humphreys's character is a lot bigger in the UK version the rocker biker is nearly non-existent in the US version I guess mainly because he was passing through and was not a past owner of the house
@@MsKaz1000 nope hetty put his head in a tree and ppl forgot about him, no really it's an episode.
@@ladylilith06 didnt isaac put his head in the stump not hetty?
No way that's one day before my birthday lol!
11:00 that’s because they all died in the manor and the manor had a noble family living in it
Pat specifically died in 1984 and Thomas died in 1824, not 1796. I like that the UK ghosts and Alison start out disliking each other. You get to see the ghosts loosen up and remember how to have fun thanks to their connection to a living person and Alison learns how to live with the ghosts instead of around them.
I see where I got Thomas' death date wrong. I was using the wiki to fact check my numbers, and I accidentally used his birthdate. Oops! My bad!
I've watched both, but as a Brit I will always side with the UK one. But I was very pleasantly surprised by the US adaptation. They both had different areas of history to draw on.
The difference in comedy styles is I think in down to the respective psyches of the two nations. Us Brits tend to be darker, more frustrated, and we tend to root for the underdog trying in tough situations. US comedies tend to be much more (sometimes relentlessly) positive and upbeat, much like the Americans I know.
Both versions have made me cry more than I feel I should at a silly comedy show. There is a lot of depth to both.
The UK used an actual mansion, throughout. The US is just a stage, they only filmed the pilot in a mansion.
and old houses had smaller rooms a Victorian bedroom in a large house would barely have room for a modern double bed but it would have an adjoining dressing room.
@@chrisdale5443 Exactly
A mansion acquired by its owner in a similar fashion to the story in the show.
So? How does it being filmed in an actual mansion vs it not being filmed in one affect the show in any way?
@@PhoenixFox5577are you allergic to a fun fact
Im dying because the UK version at 18:20 is honestly how I'd react, id be a bit concerned about the lack of pants but id more so be concered about them getting hurt than their preferred work attire. (I am an American incase that wasn't obvious)
I remember watching a video talking about the different humor styles of the UK and US, primarily using the Office for comparison. It seems that UK humor is tailored for cynicism, while US humor has a more lighthearted approach, at least for television
I think the UK version is more realistic in some ways. Ghosts stuck in purgatory are going to be there for a reason. Maybe not being able to let go of little things, bickering with people all the time, and being capable of pushing someone out of a window are telling of why they haven't moved on. And although it's certainly really positive thinking of Sam to be glad she's not mentally ill and just has a weird power, it's almost overly positive. That all being said, merely being realistic doesn't always make for a more enjoyable watching experience and I'm not sure which I prefer.
Robin from the UK version is awesome.
Love Robin’s scene with Pat talking about death early in the first season.
Robin is the absolute best!
He's so funny and nice. But also has one of the deepest feelings.
He looks simple and dimwitted on the outside, but he's so smart and complex on the inside.
Alison even says that directly to him right as he gets distracted by a bunny methinks.
Robin is one of my Families FAVS, he is the Oldest Ghost and Wisest/Smartest Ghost!!!
#justiceforrobin
@@jamesscott305 #justiceforrobin!
Wow you acknowledge a lot of good points but, you left stuff out like, when Alison finds out that Julian pushed her in season 4 she decides to move house as she doesn’t want to live with him but he refuses to apologise as he sees Alison seeing ghosts as a good thing, I love this episode because Julian (the pantsless one) gives a really good speech about how he doesn’t regret pushing her as it’s the best thing he ever did. There are also other good plot lines like the plague ghosts in the basement finding out who killed them and I love robins episode when he saves Mike from lightning as he is able to channel electricity. Overall I love the different storylines in the American version but UK wins every time.
So I've watched the entirety of the UK Ghosts, and it's one of my favourite shows ever. I remember when my parents and I watched it for the first time, we kept having to pause because we were laughing so much we couldn't breathe. Plus, I grew up with the Ghosts UK cast, since I religiously watched Horrible Histories as a kid.
I think it's kind of impossible to determine which is "better", since aside from the premise, they each have completely different styles of comedy/approach's to the situation, which is exactly what you highlighted. So it's entirely down to personal preference: the pessimism of the UK, or the optimism of the US. I've never watched Ghosts US, and I don't think I ever will, but I can definitely see why you would prefer it. What I will say, is that when it comes to the pessimism of the UK version, I think it helps the characters dynamics.
"This is shit and we're all stuck together in this shit", is absolutely true, but it means that the characters are forced to put up with the situation, which leads them to develop closer connections and relationships. Rather than the immediate positivity in the US version, Alison slowly builds relationships with the ghosts, which I really like. They make the best out of a mediocre situation, and all the ghosts show this underlying kindness, connection and appreciation for each other, that aren't initially visible. They're a family that's forced to live together constantly, so of course they're going to get annoyed with each time to time, but they still appreciate each other.
I'm obviously biased, but if you're up for it, I would recommend giving the UK version another shot, since it can be very emotional and sweet when it needs to be. Also, in regards to Julian pushing Alison out of the window, yes, it definitely makes him look bad, and it does get brought up again, since he's the reason Alison has to live with seeing ghosts.
Julian has quite a redemption arc. It wasn't until the Button House Archives (audiobook) post series that he really completed his trip.
@@lenawagenfuehr53 definitely, I loved how they brought it back! And all the characters have little arcs, but I think Julian’s is the most obvious/apparent. I haven’t read the Button House Archive book yet either but I’d love to it looks so funny 😭😭
hell the finale pre christmas special is literally alison discovering julian's involvement and the ramifications
Who tf has time to write all of this 💀🤡
One of my favorite things from the US version is that the one of the cast from the UK cameo'd in an episode as an actor portraying Pete's "dumbest death."
I think what I love about UK Ghosts is that it’s different. Obviously the style of humour is undoubtedly British but it just feels unique. With US Ghosts it just feels like any other American sitcom
But can brit say the sane thing or would they say the reverse and say " the us version is clearly American but felt unique while the uk version felt like any other british sitcom."
@jjdoughboy2103 As a Brit, yes, it feels like every other american sitcom but with a paranormal twist, where as the UK one feels less americanised than a few recent UK sitcoms, also the characters are played by the actors from Horrible histories and a bunch of the writers are, so its the comedy from our childhoods
@@jjdoughboy2103 I'm a brit, I haven't seen the American one but the UK one definitely does feel unique among British comedies
You forgot the most inportant Ghost: The Pigeon!
I love both versions tbh as they're both the same and different at the same time
Humphrey deserves more than a footnote!! He’s actually a pretty key character, and was my person favourite
I think the tone difference is mainly a cultural thing , I’m a big fan of BBC Ghosts, but I find the American version almost unwatchable. Comedy in the US and the UK can be really different and I think cynicism might just gel better with people in the uk. Also half the cast of Ghosts were the cast of a really iconic childrens show , so there all literally icons if you grew up in the 2000s or 2010s
The USA one has some good points because the original writers were taken on board. And the actors turn up.
And the actors are not all American either. This stupid snobbery of "British humour is just perfect" needs to stop. You do know Benny Hill is British, right?
I've had the exact same experience!
Must be cultural proximity. With perhaps a smidgen of 700 years.
I still had a couple "oh that's so British" moments (Alison pretending to be a Ghosts etc.), but those were honestly handled quite well, so I while they aren't my favorite moments, it's still enjoyable.
American comedy is fukin garbage.
The British will always reign supreme
@@lenawagenfuehr53Facts hurt mate.
British comics are just better. The humour is better! The jokes are just all around better.
American comedy is stupid and predictable.
The British just own it.
Absolutely no argument
And what's wrong with Hill?.
13:43 Considering Trevor went to a Diddy party, his absolute morality about not getting with Stephanie is quite surprising
Only a select elite few were invited to those “extra” activities, a random finance bro like Trevor wouldn’t be. Also there’s a chance Trevor is just lying about going to the party to sound cool to the others it’s not like they’ll know.
Youre saying that like it was a giant orgy miles out into the streets
As an Australian British comedy shows tend to be better resseved
In Australia we outsource our TV show from the UK and USA because it's cheaper and we'll our stuff is shit.
Because of our culture, dark humour and underdog stories work best
Example:
instead of bugs bunny, the sarcastic winner
Daffy duck is more popular as he's always the losing sinic
I love Daffy
Aus has some great stuff 👌
You have the legends Kathy and Kim.
As I understand it they are currently making an Australian series of Ghosts to be released in 2025.
@@davidwebb4451what!??really?oh I can’t wait!!!
There are so many times when you say you dont like the UK version because "paints X character in a really negative light/makes them seem stupid".
This is 100% where cultural humour varies between the UK and US. I wouldnt find it a negative of a comedy if some characters are flawed.
However, I actually had the opposite issue with US Ghosts. I struggled to get into it because the characters felt one dimensional and a lot of the jokes felt like they relied on stereotypes of what someone from that time period would be like. Like The Captain, in the UK version the joke isnt that he's gay, it's that he doesn't realise. The US one just hammered as many gay jokes so heavy handedly that its clear that the joke is just "hes gay haha"
That makes a lot of sense! It kind of irked me that they used Issac's actor, who has played the flamboyant gay character before. The lighting also creates more depth in the UK version imo.
I was stuggling to figure out why i disliked the US version sm but jesus, you really got it right!! Watching this video, I keep being put off by the lack of flaws the US ghosts have compared to the familial banter and errors made by the UK cast..
I have watched all of the BBC version and 2 seasons of the CBS version, and I have to say I have a clear preference towards the UK’s. I might be a little bias considering I am British myself and I have grown up with these actors from Horrible Histories. (I am just going through the video and adding my own comment onto your opinion)
- Captain and Isaac. I’m glad Isaac is from the Revolutionary Wars (is that it? I don’t know American history). It’s a change that allows them to act differently. I much prefer the way they deal with The Captain’s sexuality than Isaac’s. The Captain really feels like a person who has had to hide his identity his whole life, while Isaac acts like your stereotype of gay people.
- Yeah, Pat and Pete are very similar. I like them both, but I kind of wish they changed Pete up a little.
- Fanny and Hetty. I like how both of them change over the show and adapt to modern day life. I don’t mind that Fanny makes more comments than Hetty as I feel like it works for both of them. I enjoy that Hetty dislikes the Irish as it was a fun gag throughout. Also, Fanny being called Fanny was a great choice by the team as it gets a lot of jokes! (“Oh no! Fanny’s exposed”)
- Robin and Thorfin. I enjoy their personalities and differences. I don’t find Robin’s voice funny but that doesn’t take away from his character.
- Julian and Trevor. I much prefer Julian over Trevor! Julian being corrupt is what makes him funny and I found Trevor a little bit too nice.
- Thomas. I’m glad they didn’t translate how horny he is over because I don’t think it would work in the US version. His humour comes from how quick he falls in love with people, but it is done in a way that I borderline creepy and funny. I don’t think the US version would be able to pull it off.
- Kitty is lovely. I enjoy how her naivety is a contrast to a lot of the other ghosts.
- Mary is such a fun character. The way she speaks adds a lot of humour! (She started the whole “Sucked off” joke)
- I enjoy how the UK version sticks to the same characters as it makes the characters feel trapped. They barely add ghost character. The only one I can think of is Maddocks, and I like that they do this because it is believable that he has been there for years and he isn’t in the house.
- Alberta’s fun. I think the mystery around her death is great and it’s frustrating that they didn’t do it with many of the other characters. The US version gives away too many of their deaths right away and it’s boring! (Don’t know the quote but it felt like, “I’m Thorfin and I can control lights because I was hit my lightning.”) We didn’t know The Captain or Kitty’s death till series 5. However, I thought the episode that revealed her death was extremely disappointing!
- Sassapis my beloved! My favourite character of the bunch. I love his humour and it’s much nicer to watch compared to the others. I feel like his character is the most like the BBC characters.
- Flower. I like the idea. She just has one joke though and it gets so boring!
- What was the point of having the headless ghost in CBS? I don’t even remember his name and I wouldn’t be surprising if the show doesn’t either. He feels pointless compared to Humphrey, who is a much more developed character.
- I enjoy the BBC characters so much more because they have a darker humour. The US’s characters’ humour is barely there and they can be quite unbearable to watch at times. They make jokes that have been really dumbed down for their audience. I think the age is worse in the US as the US just doesn’t have as much history. Take the 20th century. In the UK, you have Fanny, The Captain, Pat, and Julian. In the US, you have Alberta, headless guy, Flower, Pete, dead prom girl, and Trevor. There just feels like too many of their eras overlap.
- Yeah. Alison and Mike are far more bearable than Sam and Jay. Sam is so frustrating to watch! I hate how Sam and Jay are financially okay. They say they are struggling, but that never really comes across. So much of the plot from Alison and Mike’s financial troubles (Taking out loan and being trapped, getting the builders in, having the film set, their actions in the dinner party, and trying to sell it to a hotel chain. Just to name a few.) Sam and Jay’s situation is just kinda boring. I do like how Jay is more interested in the ghosts though.
with what you said about the deaths, I completely agree, i am biased towards the uk one because i watched horrible histories religiously, however when i watched the US version for the first time, the very first episode felt like it was just "hi i'm this character and i died because of this" or "hi other character you're so good at that because you died due to this" like i do understand that they have to set the scene, but at the same time, show don't tell
I’ve seen every episode of both shows and am from the us . I completely agree with you on most every point. The us version has just rounded off all the personalities and made them too “ likable” , perky and nice. They are bland. The only character in the us version I prefer is Jay simply because they give him more to say and do. I feel the uk version has more history,pathos and soul. The financial struggles are more realistic for Allison and Mike. The uk version is just a richer experience. Even the house is more effective than the us set. I really miss this show. What we have now is just a pale reflection of the uk version.
Masterful comment!
That whole "Hi, I'm bla. And I died like bla." Is the whole reason my family and I stopped watching after five minutes. They remove the main sticking point.
I do have to disagree on one thing: I liked Kitty's death episode. Quite unexpected, yet good and believable as well. Though maybe it's just the biologist in me that likes spiders. Or maybe it's that it's a mystery episode.
The Captain's I feel could be better. I don't believe it makes sense that he wouldn't have a service revolver in '45. And him breaking in and pretending to be someone else just felt a bit off with his near religious fanaticism for King, Country and the Army.
But that's just me and my dad's takes. Nobody has to agree to it.
Overall the ending episodes weren't quite as well as the rest of the series in my opinion. Though it doesn't help that I'm comparing it to Tedd Lasso, which we we're watching at the time of the last episodes. That series is AMAZING. I've compared to the writings of SIR TERRY PRATCHETT (GNU Terry Pratchett. Speak his name) off all things (!) when it comes to quality and live truths. Then you know it's good. Their Dutch episode is even Dutch approved (By me) even though it's set in just Amsterdam. Which normally would disqualify it immediately.
I don't know how we ended up going from Ghosts to Tedd Lasso, but I'm recommending it now. Go watch it!
@@BasicallyBaconSandvichIV oh no! I love Kitty’s death episode! I love how we were given hints throughout the whole show to suggest that it was Eleanor, but it happened to be no one’s fault. It was a death no one predicted. And I love how Kitty is positive about the day she died, which is such a contrast compared to the others.
No, I hate Alberta’s death! It’s so bad! It starts off with a decent mystery, and ends suddenly without any real achievement. Apparently Hetty knew all the time? That could have worked if it was hinted to much earlier in the show.
Also, that’s not really how I view The Captain’s death. I view that he went there because he knew Haver was going to be there, and he didn’t know if he was going to see him again. Personally, I struggle to watch his death because I get second hand embarrassment from it because I wouldn’t do what he did. But, I think it makes sense for him.
@@A_Mini_A OH! That makes a lot more sense! Sorry I was a bit tired when I read it. It being past midnight and all.
And yes The Captains death is realistic to his character, and it's not That bad, but it's just that it could be better.
And yeah, the second-hand embarresment is just so great as well.
I do very much suggest that you finish the UK Ghosts, as it really has some super heartfelt episodes and scenes.
Also, Robin is one of my fave characters, and I feel it is definetly something Thor is missing. Out of the group, Robin is actually the wisest, having been around the longest, and often gives answers and advice to characters having issues. Take one episode when one of the ghosts get "sucked off", Robin is the one to help with the loss, explaining his experiences losing so many over the thousands of years.
It's something Thor doesn't really seem to have, he just seems brute and stupid, but Robin just has issues with speak (except French, he speaks that very well XD)
But, actually, looking at the characters, alot of them do change and develop through the series', which I do enjoy, they come along way and find that it is no longer a chore/curse
I am sad it ended, but it did have a really nice and bitter sweet final. Something I do really like when shows do.
I love the episode where all the uk ghost help tell a story but their almost all unreliable narrators really good plot there, I also like the us version too tho I think they both have merits :)
Possibly it's because I prefer witty humor to slapstick, I am a fan of the UK Ghosts. I also saw it first. I feel like the American Ghosts either feel like extreme caricatures of their respective times and cultures, or they don't feel like they are from that era at all. There was one episode where Sass stated that he died at a Halloween party and that this was a costume, only to reveal that was sarcasm. I was thinking it made a lot more sense to his character. I also feel like the funniest moments in the American version are when they pulled jokes directly from the UK version. I will say that Jay is an amazing addition to the show. He is by far my favorite part of the American version.
Something to note: English country houses vary in size depending on heritage, time period, wealth, funding, etc. West Horsley Place (Button House) is on the smaller size compared to similar grand estates such as Calke Abbey and Packwood House (estates owned by lower nobility); this is another reason why the concept just does not translate well for American television in my opinion: the whole idea of nobility and country estates and extreme class divisions (due to that), historical landmarks and its ghost stories, etc. is such a BRITISH concept - I have been to pubs that are older than America; my family's house is older than America by roughly thirty years (although it has been numerously reinvented)!
It makes sense that these ghosts would be stuck in their ways and bicker and be inconsiderate (horrible to an extent) people; it makes no sense to me that the American ghosts have literally no distinction of society, class, politics despite a few jokes about living in different time periods. I mean, why would a ghost from The American Revolutionary War be so openly flamboyant and "feminine" (according to the ideals of his society) with barely any shame or firm religious beliefs? I know you saw this as a negative but the ghosts need to be on some level unlikable to help create conflict and later relatability/comfort...I would rather they be horrible, dramatic, petty, selfish (dead) people than the sanatisted, friendly, harmless ghosts we see in the US adaptation.
Sorry for the rant, I just needed to get it out of my system (although I have more to say on the matter; both good and bad, if you or anyone else would like to discuss the topic further!)
yeah, or why native American who died several centuries before first colonists can speak fluent English?
@@UtamagUta Exactly, and even if one of the Ghosts tried to teach him, why would either of them bother?
@@lailadobb9221 I'm also perplexed how would teaching/learning work for an entity without brains, but I might be overthinking it. Also forgot about the viking dude. how on earth can he speak English?
@@UtamagUta I mean in the BBC Ghosts' "Robin" teaches Humphrey French; additionally, we need brains to function; to walk, to talk, to think, etc. We know they don't have human limbs anymore (Captain never being able to beat his record), but they must have some sort of Ghost brain, perhaps? Also about the Viking guy, it depends on when he died and in what location, for there is evidence to suggest that some Vikings would have been able to speak English (albeit Old English). However, the (one of the) only groups of Vikings to arrive at "North America"/Native American Tribes was Leif Eriksson (Second Son of Erik The Red; founder of Greenland) and his tribe in Greenland, yet only for the winter in 1002 before returning to Greenland...so its highly unlikely that the Viking even died in America! He was struck by lightning in 1007 and from a little bit of research (Vikings are not my area of expertise; The Great Witch Hunts (1480 - 1750) are.), the only Nordic settlers in North America (particularly the Atlantic Coast and Maine) were spairse and barely lasted beyond the mid-11th century. The only Norse group of any confirmed, archived relevance towards settlement was 'L'Anse aux Meadows' IN CANADA!
I don't know why I am so fixatedly annoyed by this awful disgrace of a sitcom/remake (similar in vain of the new "Horrible Histories').
@@lailadobb9221
The show points out it’s new historical information that Thorfinn the Viking made it to where the show takes place. One of the living states outright “there were no Vikings here.” It’s a plot point when they find his bones that it would be a major historical discovery.
No matter what there would be a language issue. Anyone pre-1500ish would be pretty hard to understand, even if they were speaking a form of English. So maybe they just learned from listening to people for a very long time.
As usual, the Americans are better at the bigger picture in a story while the British are better at the small things. In my opinion, the small things are much more important as almost anyone is respectable when it comes to bigger picture stuff. Very few people can pull off smaller picture stuff and it really is incredibly satisfying to watch a show filled with the little stuff since everything is just big stuff all the time non-stop.
Both versions are really fun. Honestly I’d love to see a version of this show from another country as well. Different countries have different historical characters leading to an interesting cast of ghosts. I really grew to love Robin in the UK version. The episode with the bear was him at his absolute best. His deepness when Mary left was sweet as well. I also love the hidden affair in the UK version. In the US version episodes that focus on Pete are guaranteed to hit the feels and Thorfin is the best character.
As I was watching the UK version I started to think of that as well. In Latvian version there would definitely be ww1 soldier rather than ww2. And probably 13th century pagan/later middle age religious merchant duo who would bicker all the time. Any of the poets/writers that made up the first national awakening, like they all are really important and really well known here. Definitely some somple peasant ghost and done politically oppressed one. Someone who died drunk driving as well, since that's a huuuge problem here
@@aleksisgabliks3881 That would be fun to watch. :D
There's going to be French and German versions!
@@katiehowell2537make the soldier a ww1 pilot and give him Isaac’s rivalry with Hamilton but with the Red Baron instead.
Welp you convinced me give the US version a shot and I love it! So thanks, it's exactly the kind of sweet comedy I was looking for.
I saw 10 episodes of the first season and I couldn't keep going
@@Taniajofre same here, stopped after 5 episodes from UK version
A lot of the differences you talk about are differences between British and US comedy. "We are all in the shit together" is the core of most British comedy. Comedy in the UK is rarely positive or upbeat, which is totally different to comedy in the US. Ap
The fact that the US series B&B succeeds whereas the UK series hotel fails just highlights this.
Ditto characters. Often negative in British comedy - and British comedy LOVES argument and disagreement.
Also, fewer episodes in the UK series, so not enough time for too much set up. No time to worry too much about the "livings" background - get on with the ghost bit.
As for small rooms, have you visited a British stately home? Apart from large reception rooms, dining rooms - often the ones on the ground floor and often for show - most rooms are relatively small. So a bedroom will often have a separate dressing room, etc. - a suite of small interconnected rooms. Why? Probably heating-related - smaller rooms are easier to heat. But the UK series reflects this very well. British stately homes are often remarkably pokey (and easy to get lost in) inside.
and they used a real one, not a stage set in the UK series
the us version is definitely my favorite show rn, i kept getting ads for it on instagram for MONTHS and i refused to give in bc im stubborn, but i ended up seeing a clip of a scene with pete seeing his daughter and grandson visit the mansion and it made me CRY so i caved lol :/ great video! might watch the uk version while i wait for the rest of season 4 to premiere
update: finished ghosts uk and did not enjoy it as much as the us version, but overall a good watch!
@@luvlyangel22 I reckon it's a cultural thing (assuming you're from the us or nearabouts) because I really struggled to get through the first episode of the us version, the bbc one fit my style of humour much better
This is a fun comparative analysis - thanks for sharing! I've watched both shows and love them both in many of the ways you describe. One big difference in the two shows is that the UK show is filmed in a real house - West Horsley Place, in Surrey. As in the show, it's a 15th century structure with a 17th century facade attached to it. The show was filmed entirely on site - interiors and exteriors. That's probably why it felt claustrophobic and dark, because it's a really old house, not a big, spacious soundstage as in the US Ghosts. The exterior of the US Ghosts mansion is in Canada, and the show's filmed in studio in Montreal. As far as which show I like better, that is so hard to say! They're both great in their own ways. I do feel that the UK version is more clever, but the US version is a little more lighthearted, so I guess whatever you're in the mood for!
Your point about the tone with which each version ends is part of why I think the UK one works a lot better. The 'this is shit but we're all stuck together' circumstance is a fantastic starting off point to force these very different characters into situations where they have to understand one another and really grow to care about each other (plus the frustration of it all is something we as an audience can find funny). The US characters, while maybe more varied in terms of age and time period, felt a lot more one-note in terms of character. It doesn't feel like these characters see much significant growth across the seasons, whereas you see such stark difference in Julian or Fanny (for example) by the end of the show, because of where they started off.
The comparison you make about the B plot of the episode in the UK, saying it was about minor frustration, it was actually Fanny coming to terms with and speaking out about the fact she was killed by her husband pushing her out of the window, like Julian did to Alison. What starts off as seemingly unconnected to the main episode's plot ties together really nicely by the end, and it's this sort of writing that I really enjoy in the UK version.
I get the point about the diversity of age ranges and time periods in the US version, but it's important to note that the cast of the UK version created, wrote, and always planned to star in the show, so they had to create characters that fit with what they are able to play (age-wise).
Your commentary videos on shows are always so fun!
13:44 im sorry did hear what i just hear
He knows...
No way he went to the diddy partys
Ain't no party like a Trevor party
He didn't sign the NDA
It aged like milk 😭
UK. Kitty and Mary were my favorites. And The Captain and Kitty's afternoon together was one of the best bits! Singing about clouds, then skipping away...loved it. The interactions between the UK ghosts feels more genuine and you believe they've been stuck together for ages. The US ghosts don't give off that same vibe - it's like they're meeting each other when they meet Sam.
This surprised me. As a Brit, I watched the whole of UK Ghosts (one of my favourite shows ever) before the US one, and with the US one, I genuinely hated the first few episodes so much I stopped watching. I think there's bias, of course, I'd seen the UK one, so I was seeing a copy of my fav show, but I think the same would have happened had I never watched the UK show.
The issues I had with the US one are simple. Subtlety and variation. In the UK, the Ghosts all kind of hate each other, and their antics constantly mess up Allison and Mikes lives in a chaotic British manor, even the ones trying to help. However, slowly, we see them caring for each other and the whole group become a family. It feels more real, as anyone forced in Lockdown with the family can tell you, you all hate each other, but still care for one another. The cynicism makes the emotional, softer moments hit harder. The US one, however, seemed to have everybody be cool with each other and the couple fairly quickly, which takes away the development like that, and the show removes almost any subtleties. Each ghost just says their key backstory immediately, and we don't learn slowly and get to know them, we just are told everything straight up. The relentlessly positive attitude makes less interesting and has less subtle character work, which is meant to be where the comedy comes from.
The other thing is variation. The US Ghosts had a chance to do something unique, tapping into the pool of their own history to make their ghosts. What they instead did was mostly copy the UK ghosts, who were all a good reflection of the Unique UK history, allowing different time periods to interact and learn from each other with different traditions and opinions (a caveman VS Victorian noble VS Witch hunt era). The US one makes two mistakes. First, most of the ghosts are from the 1900s. Whilst that time changes a lot, not as much as, say 1400s to 2010s, theres less unique outlooks. Second, it seems more focused on parallels to UK rather than making unique ghosts. You could have had, rather than another scout ghost, a Spanish sailor who was one of the first to enter the US, then died when he was shot with an arrow by a Native American (giving a rivarly with the other Native American, who could now be from like the 1000s, seeing his land be slowly overtaken, making him more bitter). Rather then another upper class Victorian lady, make a Pilgrim who is heavily Puritan. Rather than another modern day scumbag, have a Charming Wild West Outlaw who died in a gunfight (though in a more embarrassing way he would be willing to admit) and have the most recently dead one by from the 60s to add variation from both the UK and each other. My point is, too many ghosts from the US were to similar to the UK, and didn't take advantage of their own history.
The other US issue I had was that I didn't think it was funny, but thats a me thing.
I think... you don't understand US history as much as you think you do.. why the fuck would there be a wild west outlaw.. in northeastern New York???
Same! Absolutely hated the US version. The characters are annoying and not funny, especially the captain, the gay jokes were obvious and cheap, almost offensive
They can't have a cowboy because the cowboys are nowhere near that area. They in the New York Canada area. It would have to make some sort of sense because cowboys are a western USA mexico thing. The Spanish did not land that north. Maybe a French fur trader? As for the puritan.....let's just say you are gonna want to watch the new season.
@@wizbuns ... don't bring historical logic and accuracy into this.
@samwitherington8202 I'm not trying to make it a "be accurate," but let's not put a skyscraper into a western.
I watched the first season or two of the UK version before the US version came out. I have seen all of the US version. I love both. They are two different versions of the same prompt. Like two artists commissioned to paint the same subject. Many elements will be the same but yet different takes on the same subject.
Its interesting that you don't mention the castings previous role with most of them coming from cbbc's horrible histories idk but I feel that was a major boost in its viewership.
I'll be honest, nobody in America knows what "horrible histories" is. I had never heard of the show until after I got a bunch of comments on this review mentioning it. It never aired on TV, and I don't think it's legally streaming anywhere for us.
@@thejudgmentalcritter6584Horrible histories retells historical events In a comedic and slightly dark way. It is a show designed for both kids and adults. It's really fun, and very popular in the UK, most people in the uk know the themesong. If you can eventually find it whether on a streaming service or clips on TH-cam, I highly recomend it.
@@thejudgmentalcritter6584Horrible histories retells historical events In a comedic and slightly dark way. It is a show designed for both kids and adults. It's really fun, and very popular in the UK, most people in the uk know the themesong. If you can eventually find it whether on a streaming service or clips on TH-cam from the official horrible histories channel, I highly recomend it.
Yes there is a lot of good will towards them that definitely helps give their projects/shows that initial run.
Tbh, I loved Yonderland but it was so weird that I often found myself wondering who was watching it that it managed to get three series 😂 HH followers probably made up a big %
@@thejudgmentalcritter6584 I don’t know what it would be like for someone from another part of the world to start watching it by themselves now (would be interesting to hear actually) but in the countries it was airing in back in the day it was a cultural phenomenon. It was a kids show but everyone was watching it. College students, adults- and not just like moms who saw it on in the background. I remember discussing it with friends of my parents who didn’t have kids themselves 😂 and my dad was never the type who would be interested in watching disney films and stuff with us but he still quotes HH to this day (literally yesterday) 😆
What a lot of people don't seem to know is that Simon Farnaby and Mathew Baynton, who play cast members in the UK version are executive producers for the U.S. version.
All main six cast members (Mathew Baynton, Simon Farnaby, Martha Howe-Douglas, Laurence Rickard, Ben Willbond, and Jim Howick) are all executive producers for the US version as well.
@@AirConditionerCasey Well you'd hope they would be executive producers since they created the UK version!
US for two particular reasons.
1. Jay is actually involved with the ghosts! Sure he can’t see them but he still tries to talk to them the best he can and be involved in stuff. Plus he and Pete are besties.
2. Nancy. Nancy is a basement ghost that’s actually involved with the cast time to time she’s a pretty fun character.
But Mike tries to talk to the Ghosts in the original version too?
@@Wizard0fDogs Oh really? Must’ve forgotten it then my bad, he left no impression of doing so. Was there any ghost he was close to?
I still prefer Jay over Mike because he's funnier and seemingly has better chemistry with the other characters, then again maybe I haven't watched enough of UK ghosts for Mike to fully "click" to me.
I honestly can't stand Mike and just lowers the whole likeability of the show for me. He's an extremely stupid person that's to exaggerated even for fiction.
Mike didn't hit for me at all. I'm team Jay
I personally preferred the UK version’s wit. Though I am British. Whilst I liked the conflict of the American version, everything you found largely positive, I found largely negative. Sam I found to be irritating and unbelievable whilst Alison I found to be more relatable and was more invested in. Found Mike and Jay to be equally annoying so meh. Honestly knowing that they only exist to be a ‘what ghost thing?’ Character sucked, I just find it to be an overused ploy in tv. I found the UK version to have better build up and it made me personally laugh harder. I also quite enjoyed Alison’s accident because it was more understandable. She leant out a window and couldn’t see Julian behind her or shoving her out. I guess Sam just missed the large vase that made a noise when it dropped? Tbf the mansion thing seems like a cultural difference, the uk is very old there are plenty of mansions with tight halls and smaller rooms. I felt quite split on the ghosts, I preferred the Captain, Robin Julian and Kitty but I did like Flower and Alberta. I also felt the use of a colonial captain was weird, there being a Native American present and yet that obvious conflict isn’t there seems off. I really liked your take and understood completely but I’m UK all the way
The Native American Sasappis I think died well before the Americas were colonised so they likely had no obvious conflict
@@MsKaz1000 Sorry I meant that the obvious conflict would be the captain being racist. Like he was a confederate captain, wouldn't he viscerally hate native americans? I could just not be clued up enough.
@@justk4929he’s not a Confederate, almost 100 years before that in the American War of Independence
Just going to say Sam and Jay were arguing when the vase dropped. That's why she didn't hear it and fell.
"Theyre almost all nobles of some sort". Boy scout, MP, peasant, soldier, poet, caveman, cellar ghosts.... Um... Do americans just think anyone with a british accent is a 'noble'?
As a Dutch half-Irishman (just zo yous know I don't have any sort of stake in this) I watched UK Ghosts with my family. Absolutely loved it! The ending could have been better, but it was great! We tried watching the US version, but we couldn't even get through five minutes.
The main appeal of UK Ghosts is that we learn more about the characters as the show goes on. Some things aren't even revealed until some of the last episodes! But the US version just.... Tells you EVERYTHING in the first five minutes!
The key difference is show versus tell.
UK Ghosts SHOWS.
The US version TELLS.
It just degrades the story and make everything feel clunky and forced. I don't like it at all.
After watching the video I've noticed that a lot of the things you didn't like about the UK Ghosts are exactly some of the things I preferred.
Like for instance a large part of the UK Ghosts is figuring out how to live together (which is why that annoyance is an important plot for the first episode. It shows the ghost are actually not that scary and most importantly that they have issues WITHOUT ALLISON THERE. Such things just couldn't be in anything but the very first episode). It just makes more sense to me that that's something which would take time. Which the UK Ghosts portray very well.
I also prefer Robin. You're not really supposed to laugh every time he speaks caveman like, only occasionally. He's actually really smart, a very good chess player. But that's countered with him getting easily distracted by things (like bunnies or spiders, which makes sense), not quite understanding such modern things, and him saying things in caveman talk. Things like dadonka dadonka when moving a chess piece.
He, and the other UK ghosts, have lots of secretly hidden layers to their character you just won't see in the first couple episodes.
Also, the mansions rooms and hallways were quite regularly sized. I live in a fairly modern house compared to some (1891, the town up the road has houses from before the Netherlands existed as a country. AKA, the 1600dreds) and they've got slightly bigger hallways there. I don't know about American houses, but the size makes sense.
So I don't know whether the it comes down to culture, which we've seen first or simple presence. But these are a couple reasons why I like the UK Ghosts.
I'll still probably watch some more US Ghosts though, just to check if it's truly as bad as I dread it may be (usually those shows are way worse and sometimes even ruin the original). Hopefully not.
@@BasicallyBaconSandvichIVthe more deep you get into the US version of Ghosts a bunch of new cans of worms open up. I genuinely think it’s hilarious. My husband and I watch it every time it airs on television. I know how they basically reveal everything (like how they passed away) in the first episode but the more you go into the show it reveals a lot about their past.
Exactly!! Although, one “show” the American did SUPER well was finding out how Hetty died
The UK version has so much heart, I have cried during several episodes. I love it and will be starting it over again.
I love the US version. I couldn't get through the first 5 minutes of the British version. Film quality is shit in the UK
17:35 Having a ‘side plot’ at the start of the first season is arguably far better than having it in a mid-season episode as it is a great way to almost show the monotonous life of the ghosts, and how boring being a ghost actually is. For me I just find the begrudging, reluctant tone way more convincing and realistic in the UK one.
Ive watched the US version and I absolutely love it. The hardest part about enjoying it though was that I couldn't find people talking about it online who weren't bashing it for not being the UK version. So finally having my views validated is like, awesome. It's a fun show and I'm really excited for it to continue.
That’s super valid. I personally prefer the UK version, but just because it’s the only one I’ve seen and I grew up with the cast.
People will always tend to like what they’re used to, it’s a big reason why there would be massive arguments about dub vs. sub in Anime.
But I think people definitely have a tendency to really devalue US versions of UK TV. There is a sort of “air of superiority” around it, which sucks, because from what Critter said in her video, I can totally get why someone would prefer the U.S. version, especially if it’s the one they first watched!
It was surprisingly humorous.
Exactlyyy
Same here. I love Ghosts US and watch it every week. In my opinion, its a comedy how comedies should be. I tried watching Ghosts UK, in hope that I would have 2 Ghosts shows to love but I found Ghosts UK to be slow moving, boring, and dreary. No offense to those who like it, just a difference in taste and culture. But my vote definitely goes to Ghosts US. Love the show.
I was pleasantly surprised by the American version of Ghosts. They have taken things to a different place (with the possession storylines, for example) and the cast is just amazing. I like to watch both
I remember watching ghosts and going like “hold up isn’t this like most of the cast of horrible histories”
As someone who’s only seen the Uk ghosts I do like the concepts they couldn’t do here such as the indigenous American and the hippie since those would only be available in America and I like there creativity
Puh lease, there were plenty of hippies in Europe 🙄
Swinging London was almost a decade before the Summer of Love in the US. Led Zeppelin, The Beatles and The Who with their drugs and groupies would disagree that there were no hippies here, also the UK had indigenous people before we arrived, the original Bretons and Picts and before that the ancient Druids.
I love how the cast of the British one also play the plague ghosts. Very theatrical tradition. Most of the cast also appeared in the TV show for kids called Horrible Histories.
I know the UK had the cast of horrible histories, and that's all I know
I have watched neither, but that alone makes it automatically superior to the US version.
They (the 6 Idiots, a fan nickname) also did a film called ‘Bill’ and a show ‘Yonderland’ in between HH & Ghosts!
The UK cast also wrote ghosts, it was their concept. But it definitely comes down to sense of humour. I loved the UK version but couldn’t get on with the US version at all, it was all to upbeat and bubbly, for a show that is about a woman who al ostensibly dies and can then see ghosts, it was all a bit much for me personally.
13:49 bro hearing thorfin say "whats a diddy?" Is WILD
Ok so not seen either of theses show so bear with me.
The mansion size thing you mentioned, ya even the uk old timey large estates tend not to be that big.
Feel from how you described it the UK verion was first and that gives the US version time to rewrite and improve on somethings, with the benefit of hindsight.
The lighting and colours again i feel come done to culture. American tv has definitely come off as more " look how big, bright and colorful everything is!".
Feel like the ghosts directly trying to kill her and touching her may have been apart of the reason she sees them, but for american verion they saw this was not really important long term and went their own way.
The part where UK verion seems to be made up of small annoyances and the US is very " well lets go with it" seems very UK attitude vs US attitude. Infact i feel if you had not mentioned which was which version i would have easily guessed it.
Going to say though, i have not seen either and I'm probably not going to. Neither sounds like my thing. But thanks for sharing. It was interesting to here about the 2's differences and similarities.
Trever dodged not just a bullet a missile by not getting into that party
I love both UK and US versions. They are both good in their own way. You just have to get past the first few episodes of the US one, as it’s super speed repeats through the UK premise.
Honestly as someone who watched US Version from Shorts and UK version Wirh my mom
I liked both.
not british, but i genuinely adore the uk version and cannot STAND the american one… it feels like it’s trying too hard to be sincere, which takes away from the humour of the uk version.
i could go on forever with my issues with what you said in this video, but obviously - to each their own, and i’ll just leave it by saying whilst i have rewatched the uk version 3 times, i found the us one absolutely unbearable.
11:23
"Let me hit that" followed immediately by "reminds me of torthed village"
“There’s an arr…. We’ve been through this.” God I love Pete.
No help, I just finished the UK version today and cried because it was so good and I can’t watch it for the first time again 😭
Okay, unpopular opinion, but i like the US better. I can't describe it why and how, but i just like how the US one.
I’m the same here.
Same. It's a bit more cheery. I have enough dour awkwardness in my life lol
You American? British humour tends to only really work for British people.
So happy I saw the UK version first. It's the better series
I tried the US version of ghosts, but it just didn't feel the same. I sort of grew up with six of the actors that play the main ghosts and honestly think that they are hilarious. I actually really enjoyed watching the characters develop and learn how to get along and learning their back stories and why they are the way they are.
I definitely am in the boat of preferring the UK version over the US one. I find british comedy more entertaining, personally and love the cast of the show. Their previous big show was Horrible Histories, which I love a lot too. I personally find the US one to be kind of annoying at times, honestly.
Believe it or not, British historical buildings aren't actually that roomy inside compared to how large they look outside - and that has a lot to do with large open spaces are harder to keep heated. And also the walls are usually at least a foot thick.
I love that you did this comparison I have not seen the British version but I am a fan of the American version so seeing this is really great thank you so much 😊
3:19 I've only seen the US version of Ghosts but here in the UK we call scoutmasters, Scout leaders(or just leaders)
Fascinating! :D
I’m an American and I MUCH prefer the English version. It is the original and the American version wouldn’t exist if the English version didn’t. I don’t know how it took you so long to see the English version. I saw it, in the US, long before the American version even was a thought. The English version is much more poignant; you really care about the characters and are invested in their happiness. I’ve seen a couple of episodes of the American version and it just seems like a caricature of the original version. And I love the ending of the English version; instead of beating a dead horse, they brought the show to a satisfying conclusion before it started to get stale.
Oh, and by the way, the English version was filmed in a REAL mansion, so that’s why some of the scenes seemed a bit closed in. You can go on TH-cam and get a tour of the mansion they used. I’ll bet the American version uses film sets.
Where did you see it? Which streaming service was it? Because I looked for ages and couldn't find it anywhere!
@@thejudgmentalcritter6584 I saw it on Daily Motion originally. Later I bought it on Amazon Prime because I love it so much, I go back and watch it again and again.
2 things I really loved,
First your icon, the little critter is adorable.
2nd I love how each time thor gave an example it got more brutal and disturbing each time
Considering the people who made the UK version also made the American version and then left the US Ghosts to new writers. They will always be similar
I vastly prefer the UK version. I've even bought the entire show off of Amazon.
The UK show has this mixture of comedy and bittersweet moments. And I really like that. The ghosts can be funny, but they can also make you cry.
I'd say it also sounds like you didn't watch even Season 1 of Ghosts all the way through.
1) Humphrey (the headless ghost is far more important to the series, though he's also forgotten at times. Meanwhile Crash in the US series disappears fro two seasons, pops up, and as far as I'm aware has disappeared again.
2) Thomas didn't die in 1780 whatever. He died in 1820 something (24 maybe?) . While I do find him stalker-y, I also think he's a good example of a Romantic artist. Their passions ruled them, and that was not always a good thing.
I could go on for quite a while about how the American version is disappointing and inferior. I think I'll just sum it up as they turned the show into ship bait where everyone is dating everyone else suddenly despite having been trapped in the house together for decades, and the writers don't know what to do with them now they've played out all the romantic tension.
Meanwhile the British version has no one dating anyone. And while there are hits something might have happened here or there in the past, for the most part they're not interested. They're Friends, not lovers. Well, friends on a good day. They're also an example of Sartre's No Exit.
The one thing I did like in the US show as having Sam's fall be an accident rather than an attempted murder by ghosts. That was bad. I also like how Jay attempts to play D&D with the ghosts, and how he and Pete have a bit of a friendship as well, though Sam has to be a go between. Mike never really gets close to any of the ghosts.
Anyway, the US version has awful writing and no heart despite its many sexual relationships. The UK version is the much better product in terms of its emotional core. Ghosts will make you both laugh and cry. And I love that.
I’ve only watched a few episodes of the us version didn’t like it at all. The Allison and Mike are far superior to the us version couple. I also like the ghosts better. The acting and comedy in us version isn’t as funny. Us version just feels like they took the uk show and put in the typical us boring network sitcom format.
@@sowhatchajen2846 Re: US sitcom format.
I think its format does borrow from that at times, but that's not actually what they're doing (or if they were, they're doing an awful job of it. I mentioned the romantic relationships as a problem. Part of it is that they don't know how to do a network Slow Burn. In the show Lois and Clark, and old network Superman show, where the entire audience know Lois and Clark are eventually going to get together, I think they kept that bait going for 3 years, maybe 4 before they finally got together.
In the US ghosts, probably their most successful relationship was the Revolutionary soldier having a long-term infatuation with the Red Coat officer that he accidentally killed. The story was introduced with the premise that there's 3 British Red Coats who live in a shed on the property, and that every year, he comes to the house with his men and has an argument with Issac (the Revolutionary) over ownership of the house, I think it is. They have a huge argument. And then he leaves and comes back again next year.
And when you find out that Issac acutlaly likes him, it's kind of cute. And Sam and Jay push to move things forward so that they aren't just arguing with each other once a year, and could maybe start courting. And as much as I find the romances in the show irritating, this was the first one, and seemed to be well set up in the characters' backstories, so I was willing to go along with it and see where it went.
And then it basically did a speed run of multiple dating obstacles that should have had legitimate conversation and growing together as a couple, as well as coming up with quite a few ridiculous ones. Like, there actually was a friends stage before a courting stage and that seemed like it should have lasted longer considering Issac was in denial about being gay in the first place. But even after that, there should have been more talk. Various philsophical differences to get over. Various past mistakes to get over. Basically there was lots of grist for the mill that should have made the relationship take time. And the show just would not slow down the romance.
To be clear, I can get irritated with shows that move too slowly on their romantic plots, but this was ridiculously fast And again, I actually liked this pairing and thought it was interesting and promising.
If they'd been running the show like a proper network show, they would have stretched things out, much longer. And heck, the arguments between the two would have been of historical, but we're going to totally ignore that they have massively opposing political views to the point that one of them shot the other. That doesn't need to be worked through at all and will take no time.
I'd say that maybe it was a speedrun because the writers thought gay romance was icky, but the straight couples got worse treatment (less development, a faster speedrun, and a certain blandness to the whole story just so everyone could be having sex with everyone else. It was very disappointing.
@@jenniferhanses I wasn’t expecting such a detailed response. I love UK ghosts so much. I bought season 4 on dvd when there was no way to get it here in us and I have a uk regions PlayStation to play uk dvds (I have several uk region dvds I think darkplace was the first). Luckily I was able to buy the 5th season digitally. I still may get a box set. All this to say I was also very disappointed in the US version too. I loved Julian’s arc by the end. The push was important to his story.
@@sowhatchajen2846 I still find Julian pushing Sam one of the worst things in the original Ghosts.
And his apology for it in the 5th season was awful.
The reason that it was awful was that it didn't matter what he did or what Alison did, I was never going to be happy with any of the resolution possibilities:
1) Alison leaves never to return. I don't want Alison to leave her friends. She's an orphan who has wanted a family her whole life and here they are.
2) He doesn't apologize and Alison stays. He tried to murder her. He's no longer an annoying relative, he's a danger to her and her family. She's a fool to stay.
3) He apologizes and she stays. There is no apology that is ever going to be good enough for "I wanted to murder you, I tried to go through with it, and I failed." There is nothing he can do to make up for it. She needs to leave. And again, I don't want her to leave.
I really did not like Season 5. It has its high points. I liked the April Fools episode. But for me, but show ends with the whole cast dancing to Achy Breaky heart. The rest of it is just so bad. And pointless. Alison leaving does not fix her seeing ghosts. Alison leaving does not fix her and Mike having crap job prospects. Her best move was to live in the house and find a way to make money off of the land and house itself. Because working a minimum wage job for the rest of her life while being pestered by ghosts sounds way worse.
@@jenniferhanses They got a lot of money for the house and grounds, not just that bit for the golf course to be honest it would have been nice if they got shares in the hotel but the fact every Christmas they have their usual room may also have been written into the sales contract and the basement ghosts enjoying the lovely sauna room was sweet
Actually several of the Actors in the British "Ghosts" are also involved offstage in the US "Ghosts". They're executive producers.
Also, I like both series.
I actually like both of them equally. The US version is more lighthearted, wholesome and feels like a classic sitcom, the UK version is more horror like and it’s more intense(more tragic, melodramatic and frustrating sometimes). This is what I’m looking forward to in adaptations, taking the same concept and telling original stories with it, complete with different emotions and atmospheres. Watch them depending on the mood, they cater to different cultural influences and it’s fun to point out the differences.
I'm British and have seen both shows. I found your opinions really interesting and maybe it does just come.down to culture? All of the UK show is filmed on location, the dull colours and somewhat small rooms compared to the occasional large ones is just how a lot of old locations are, and as for the more negative tone and cynical humor that seems to be out approach to things? I did enjoy the US one a lot more than I thought, my main problem with the US one was there are a lot more ghosts, and while that makes sense for longer seasons, the premise of the show is that they're stuck together and if there is a large crowd they'd just break off into small groups, like how Issac Hetty and Nigel form a group, or Sass and Trevor hang out often
Also with the first UK episode, that sets the whole franchise up where the US had an extra 10 episode and the world pr built to really branch out from x I do agree the US is more cheerful but idk I find US shows more cheerful overall x with great shows ans again really enjoyed this video of your views x
I liked both versions of the Ghosts. Each for different reasons.
Thanks to this video and your non biased opinions i decided to give ghosts us and i really like it so thank you
I will say i still prefer the uk ghosts intro
I distinctly remember seeing the UK Ghosts on streaming before the US version even premiered!
The main reason the UK Ghosts are mostly the same age isbecause most of the UK actors have been collaborating for decades and so many of their projects are made around them and not them having to fit into a role. A contributing factor to most of them being nobles is that group’s most famous collaboration is from the award winning seasons of the UK children’s Comedy Edutainment series Horrible Histories and a lot of the characters are references to archetypes each actor often played in that show. Notable Horrible points of history that can be quickly explained to kids tend to involve either nobles, the poorest society or a generalisation of the whole culture so ghosts characters being spiritual successors carry that through.
(Because horrible histories had a lot of parodies some modern stuff seeped in but the references are very late 2000s British so it probably doesn’t transfer to America as well. There was a point where almost every British child knew at least one HH song by heart. A lot of British people describe Ghosts as “the show with the Horrible Histories cast” even though there have been other cast)
If you did like the UK version, which I also haven't seen, you might enjoy Yonderland, one of those kids shows that's funny for adults too. So much of the cast stick together for other projects, like You, Me and the Apocalypse.
19:00 I love the UK version because of its costumes, acting and sets. It’s a manor not a mansion and there is a difference
I didn't know there was a difference between manor and mansion! Learn something new every day! :D
Also the actress that plays Sam was a Power Ranger. She's the RPM Yellow Ranger
Probably the Ranger actor with the most durable later career. Solid in iZombie, too.
Can I just compliment you on producing such an informative and interesting video. I love Ghosts, and your video answered so many of my questions 😊
0:17 Hetty really said 🧍
The US market one works for the US audience. It's a bit too peppy and nice for UK audiences: we like pathos, schadenfreude, and depth. The US one works but it does feel very gee, swell, oh honey baby to us.
Ghosts UK is far better.
I’ve seen both versions, and I much prefer the US version, I fined the characters more interesting and I like the chemistry the actors have
I like the ghosts in both versions, and this is really a show where localisation makes sense, but I like the couple in the UK version more and I came in from Horrible History so I prefer the UK version. I do appreciate the US version uses the premise to tell a story unique to that setting though. It’s a very exportable premise.