MovieChat Forums > Whose Line Is It Anyway? (2023) Discussion > why do people prefer the amercain versio...

why do people prefer the amercain version

posted 16 years ago by Jonny4d
17 replies | jump to latest

my personal apinion is its not as good as the UK version, i think the americain show is far to hollywood and in your face, the US show loved its musical games and come up with some really unfunny games (aka supermodels) which seemed to stick to the show, and that ryan and colin seem to be less clever with humour

i thought the UK show was more clever humour wise, and even though i thought the cast seemed more comfortable in the americain version, i thought she show itself was more comfortable in the UK version

sorry this is just my apinion

[–] droog69uk 16 years ago

I too thought the UK version far better. Although Ryan and Colin are great on the US show, there's 2 things that stop me enjoying the American version - Drew Carey and the annoying studio audience who WHOOP and clap pretty much anything anyone says.

People like Greg Proops worked much better on the UK show - plus we had brilliant players like Josie Tony,and Mike who weren't even asked onto the US show (apart from Josies 2 spots).

Add a much more interesting and wider mix of cast members rather than same 3 players every game (and a lack of censorship) and You have a far better show IMHO.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (10213601) 16 years ago

i honestly like both but i think people seem to prefer the American one as the performers seemed to let themselves go a bit more if you know what i mean. And Drew Carey was happier and laughed along a lot more than Clive did, and also let games go on for a bit longer. Clive seem to cut them short sometimes.

The loud audience and clapping and shouting can make it more fun for some people. But as i said i love both versions. Prefer later UK ones to the arlier ones though, when Ryan and Colin were regulars!

[–] danthake 16 years ago

They obviously made it more 'american', more whopping and cheering from the crowd and quicker games played for laughs more than theatre, which obviously gets the audience going and in turn the performers. Didn't make for more laughs most the time though, the guests were unnecessary and having THREE regular performers was a little overboard however good they all were.

I never saw the need for drew carey to get involved, clive was a far better, funnier host who is very quick and funny himself - his back and forths with greg were classic.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] dave_smith1984 16 years ago

And Drew Carey was happier and laughed along a lot more than Clive did

I really think it's time to put this myth to bed. If you watch UK WL Clive is usually grinning between rounds, and the compilation shows often showed him cracking up. The only difference is the camera never cut to Clive laughing, as in the US version, because he knew he wasn't the star.

Dan Patterson reveals on the DVD that Clive was incredibly nervous when the show first started, so might appear less involved, but as time goes on you can see him relax much more and enjoy himself, frequently sending himself up too.

Some of Clive's banter with the audience & performers are as good as the improv itself. But his humour is very dry & I guess that's not as accessible.

[–] meddimel 16 years ago

Because people are idiots. I'll never understand how anyone finds Drew Carey even remotely funny.

[–] knawdas 16 years ago

It could just be that I'm an American and watched the ABC version since its debut (and wasn't aware at the time that the show was actually entering its eleventh season) but I just find the English ones to be very dull.

I like the rapid-fire, in your face raunchiness of the ABC version; at least the jokes are immediate, instead of, say, any joke from "Authors" where you had to run to a library and read a novel to figure it out. Drew is also a far superior host than Clive, because Clive seemed totally disconnected from the actors; I think Drew being an active participant really boosted the show.

[–] carzy_6 16 years ago

The American one was cack.

See? I can state opinion as fact too. But that was completely true, it was. I wanted to watch Whose Line, not a neutered version. Not a tame work of overly-American garbage where every joke is watered down and, if US audiences are to be believed, worthy of a round of applause. It's ridiculous. The UK version is more intimate and relaxed, instead of the -- supposedly -- raucous US version.

And Drew was far worse than Clive. Clive had wit and great banter with Greg and didn't think so much of himself that he had to get involved in the bloody games himself.

If you want to know how to run a perfectly good show into the ground, make it American!

---
"Just deal with your girlfriend's cheesy feet. She puts up with your cheesy face." - Jack Dee

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] zill_o_the_wisp 13 years ago

"If you want to know how to run a perfectly good show into the ground, make it American! "<<

I think that statement, on principle, is entirely unfair. But seeing as how I have no principles, and may only go on reality as I see it, I agree 100%.

What us Yanks did to 'The Office' was also a disgrace. I apologize on behalf of all our people.

"I'm Glad" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQP9QjNjeR4

[–] zill_o_the_wisp 13 years ago

knawdas : "I like the rapid-fire, in your face raunchiness of the ABC version; at least the jokes are immediate, instead of, say, any joke from "Authors" where you had to run to a library and read a novel to figure it out."<<

Oh, Heaven's Forbid! Thank Geawd we had Drew Carey to keep it on an Everyman-level, right?

"Clive seemed totally disconnected from the actors"<<

I can't fathom where you got that from.....

"I'm Glad" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQP9QjNjeR4

[–] Evanesco 16 years ago

It's always beyond me why people seem to think anything 'UK' is superior in humour to anything 'US'. American humour doesn't equate to fart jokes and running into things.

I'm not from America or the UK but I think both versions are as good as each other. However, they both have their strong and weak points.

But to answer the topic, why do people prefer the American one? Well, that's what a lot more people were exposed too. In Australia, they screened the US one and if you wanted to watch the UK one, you had to get cable. And even on cable, the US one was played more than the UK one. I'll admit I got hooked to Whose Line through the US one but I've also developed an appreciation for the UK series too.

I also think the US one is more accessible to a wider audience. Early UK episodes are, I think the term is 'highbrow'.. I'm not sure. And I feel America would put a higher emphasis on getting good ratings than in the UK. Hence a reason why there were a lot of celebrities/surprise guests appearing on the US one.

There are probably a lot of other factors but it's past midnight and I can't think of them.

[–] adampearce96 16 years ago

I think UK is better. I also think they should do an aussie version with 6 seats and 3 regulars, then you can still vary performers.

Brandee with 2 E's? Big company like this & they spell it wrong!
-Nicholas Colosanto 1924-1985

[–] adampearce96 15 years ago

The US was worse because you almost always had just 1 guest star, why didn't you add more seats like in the christmas episode? 2x07.

Did you kill anyone?
Just Cops
Any real people?
Just Cops
-White & Pink, Resevoir Dogs

[–] zill_o_the_wisp 13 years ago

Blanket generalization (which I'm nonetheless unashamedly going to put out there...):

The UK version would be a hit with the sort of American viewer who digs Tracey Ullman and Stephen Colbert and 'The Simpsons'.
The U.S. version of the show would be a hit with the sort who fancies 'America's Funniest Home Videos' and 'Friends' and 'Family Guy'.

Genuinely clever and intelligent comedy vs. Forced, vulgar & over-obvious comedy.

I am an American who would have LOVED to find the U.S. version half as witty as the U.K. - there is nothing snobby in my personal verdict that the U.S. fails on every level.
One of the tings that really kills my appreciation of the latter is: there is no audience participation to speak of. The Brit's seemed to really be part of the show, not a typical, passive, clapping-monkey, studio audience like the U.S. version has.
And the British talents of Tony Slattery, Josie Lawrence, John Sessions, Paul Merton, Jonathan Pryce, and Stephen Fry were unmatched in the U.S. version.

Even the better American talents: Greg Proops, Michael McShane, and Archie Hahn, all seemed to bring their best to the British version. There was definitely something special about the original.
And definitely something vulgarized about the Yank version!

"I'm Glad" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQP9QjNjeR4

[–] VCR 13 years ago

Drew Carey isn't funny, but he let them finished a scene if they were on a roll. I found Clive Anderson to be jittery and button happy if a cast member started to get funnier in a scene. Clive Anderson was, to me, uptight and, "how dare we start having fun!".

Come on, Franklin! It'll be a fun trip!

[–] karnot 12 years ago

>>"why do people prefer the amercain version"

If by "people" you mean "USians" - there's your answer.

>>"i think the americain show is far to hollywood and in your face"

If that was "in your face" already - i wonder how would you describe improv-a-ganza...

>>"people seem to prefer the American one as the performers seemed to let themselves go a bit more"

Yeah...and were instantly "bleep"-ed, or warned, because "we are owned by Disney".

>>"I think Drew being an active participant really boosted the show."

No comments...