You had me until you said the British version didn’t have character growth. Those characters absolutely grow and change. Pat forgiving his killer, the Cap beginning to reckon with his queerness, Fanny recognizing her worth Mary finding a voice, etc

Something about the BBC show that the American version doesn't, is that they show Allison looking like a real woman who is dealing with such a house that needs repairs. They show her looking disheveled or sick or stressed out but in the American show, they never show Sam looking like that. She's always put together and manicured. That I think just shows how different the writing is when it comes to the two countries.

To me, a big part of BBC Ghosts is that the cast have known each other for years and it reflects on screen. There is also an element of nostalgia for the British as they were the cast of Horrible histories. I grew up watching Horrible Histories, their songs are iconic and a quintessential part of British culture. 😊 They also did Yonderland and Bill, so there is a somewhat familiarity with these characters as we know and love the actors. Alison’s actress, Charlotte Ritchie, is bloody brilliant. She may not be as well known as the others but she has been in other BBC shows. Most people will recognise her from Fresh Meat, Dead Pixels or Call the Midwife ❤ The American version lacks the charm and nostalgia. The simplicity of the plot is what makes ghosts enjoyable. I have enough drama in my life without a chaotic, jam packed tv show. The BBC episode where his family come to stay is beautiful. Mike resolves his issues and frustrations with his family, Julian bonds with Mike’s niece and looks up what became of his daughter. It’s a brilliant episode.

NOTHING about the UK version or its characters is "wearing thin." Every episode is exceptional.

I think the ghosts’ slow character development is a deliberate choice. They’ve lived in a bubble for hundreds on years, unable to interact with the living world, learning of changes in the world second hand and being unable to ask their own questions. So they’ve had to rely on their observations with their own flawed interpretations or the interpretations of the living people they overhear. People require new information to challenge old thought patterns, and there has been a dearth of information here, so I find it very plausible that it takes a long time to develop their characters. Moreover, I feel it’s their change-averse personalities that has led them to being stuck as ghosts in the first place. Annie, the Puritan housemaid was “sucked off” when as she realised she was free in death more than in life. And Mary also said there had been other ghosts who had been “sucked off” in the past. These ones that stay are just the most stubborn and resistant to change.

The character development of the uk ghosts is significant but subtle and set over the 4 series’ we currently have. They are not just caricatures of people from specific points in history, we learn (not only) about each characters death & the impact that has had on each ghost (leading to their acceptance, or not, of it) but also about significant points in their life that they learn from through the years of their afterlife. Please don’t confuse subtle long-arching character development as no character development. UK Ghosts is awesome (not that I’m biased 😁)

ALL the ghosts in the UK version have character development and that is shown over the series, this is the whole point! Each week we get to know ALL about them, it may take 10 weeks but that's how life is... You don't meet someone in a pub and know everything about them by 11pm! It take time to find out who people are!

Fun fact: the premise of Alison inheriting a big country house isn't only based on a real story, it's the real story of the house that they used as the filming location for the show! I don't know if they got the idea from the house, or if that was always the idea and it's just a crazy coincidence, but it's cool either way.

It’s entirely inaccurate to claim that Ghosts (UK) has no character growth. The Captain develops a father-daughter-like relationship with Kitty and learns to be more authentic to himself even though he has yet to admit his queerness, Mary found her voice and came to terms with her traumatic and unjust death, Pat learns to be more assertive, and even forgives his killer. Fanny loosens her corset (metaphorically), Julian becomes (slightly) more empathetic, Kitty gains confidence in her own worth &c. The group as a whole have a much closer dynamic now than at the beginning, as they have learned to more than merely tolerate each other, though not all of them would admit that. You make it sound so static and that’s just not the case at all?

I think I enjoy the LGBTQ representation in the UK version. It's less blatant and more "show don't tell". I also enjoy how Humphrey changes Fanny's views on the whole gay marriage thing with his own take that "people should choose who they want to marry". I thought that was cute. Oh yeah the captain. It is h e a v i l y implied that he is not heterosexual but that's not his character. I like that. Also the sitting down in a circle episode I think the captain wanted to say he loved Havers lol

I think you missed the plot of the British version of Ghosts. "A family comes to visit" isn't the plot. The A plot is about how Mike's family disrespects him and doesn't see him as a man, and how he tries to get respect in their eyes, and fails. The B plot is about Julian learning the importance of family, thereby advancing his character. The C plot is about Alison wanting to celebrate Christmas with her own traditions, and Mike and his family not being into those, but in the end, the Ghosts understand her. And she looks, very briefly, the part of the true lady of the hall. The UK plotting is there, it's just slower (they do have an hour of time compared to a 22 minutes in the US), and much more subtle (which is the main problem I have with the US version of ghosts). At this point, I'll vote that the UK version is better. Part of it is the hour long time to allow the characters to breathe. But much of it is just better characterization overall. Yes, I would like to see the Captain find happiness/come out as gay. But the social stigma was so bad in the UK that in his own time, he would have been castrated. He behaves as it makes sense that he should. Also he has more personality than just being gay. He's the group leader in a lot of respects. He displays loyalty to his country. He and Pat enjoy outdoors activities when given the opportunity. And there was storytelling hinting at a gay romance that fans of the series are waiting to see the outcome of. Meanwhile the US version ... doesn't behave right. He's like someone wore Hamilton cosplay to a Pride parade rather than a Revolutionary War soldier that also happens to be gay. Most of these I'll put down to the actor, but I'll add here that the posture bothers me, and that is all the actor's fault. People in that time did not slouch. Military men particularly do not slouch. but put him or his lover in a chair and they slouch all over the place like someone took the starch out of their clothes. It's really distracting, and does a wonderful job of ruining any hope of an illusion that these people might be from the time they claim. Then you look at his personality -- he's gay, gay, gay, gay, gay and ... well, I supposed I could add drama queen, but that's so associated with gay in television that they're practically the same thing. I can't really tell you anything else about him. They did show him inventing something once. I'd love to see him show interest in technology, but he doesn't other than that one time. He could talk about his wife and his children. Yes, I know he's very gay. Yes, he probably didn't love his wife. (Though that begs the question of why he picked her to marry out of everyone). But he doesn't show any interest or curiosity in what happened to his family at all, nor any fond memories. I mean, I don't expect her to be the love of his life given the circumstances, but do you really have no affectionate memories of your spouse? How about some regrets, considering you couldn't be the man she wanted, but you married her anyway? I do like the romance that they had brewing for Isaac. But I think they played their hand on the issue much too quickly. The romance is pretty much settled in one episode. We deserve better than that. They don't have to tease it out for ten seasons, but how about just a few episodes? Maybe two seasons? By two seasons everyone wants a couple to get together no matter what. I have other issues like that with the show. Isaac is really the most off character, but many of them just don't make sense: Trevor, why did you give the other man your underwear? Ick. Why do Thor and Sass not speak to each other in Sass's language? I mean, Thor was here for 500 years before the English came, and several of those centuries were spent with Sass. I would expect him to have picked up the language, and only switched over to English at a later point. Though, probably the worst part is that the ghosts only change because of Sam, as she teaches them lessons about modern morals. This was particularly disturbing to me when Hettie started going on about how Sam had changed her life, making her a more liberated woman. All I could think was that she'd spent a century with Alberta. Where's the things Alberta taught her? Why does only Sam have the power to improve lives? Why can't the ghosts improve their own lives? Or each others lives? Because in the UK version, the ghosts do care about each other, and improve each other's lives and Alison's life (as the Christmas song symbolically shows them supporting her). But in the US show, Sam is the only one with the power to teach.

People who agree the BBC version is better ⬇️

Quality tv materiel does not require fast pacing, flashy plots or over the top acting. The U.S version is drowning in all of that, while the BBC version is simple, hilarious, and authentic all on its own. -opinion from an american fan of BBC ghosts :)

"The comedy and drama comes from the characters just interacting with each other" THAT is what makes the BBC version peak comedy. Not only the fact that slap-stick is kept to a serious minimum, but the fact that they are also able to so eloquently include drama and tragedy through the ghosts' stories, memories, and mere interactions with each other is what makes this show so good. There ISN'T a need for a wild plot or impossible challenge. All that's necessary for the storytelling is the actor's ability and the reason for the story that is being told. This show makes me laugh out loud, and cry uncontrollably. There is so much emotion and STORY crammed into every moment of each episode, that it is nearly impossible to be bored with it. The CBS version, on the other hand, is unable to meet that same standard for depth and comedy. They cut characters, blur the lines of history, wave bad acting to final cuts, and when they can't get a laugh through a genuinely funny joke- they resort to smutty ones that just don't hit. I admit there are a few jokes in CBS Ghosts that I laughed at, but the overall feeling of the show is bland and severely lacking the chemistry that the original cast has.

Thank god I found the original Ghosts first. Always loved Horrible Histories so it was nice to see the cast again

Short answer: yes. Long answer, the US cast was thrown together via a casting agent, whereas, the original was written collaboratively, by a group with a long history of performing together. This group, while talented, falls short of the mark. It's like the vanilla icemilk version. I can rewatch the UK version over and over. Meanwhile, I struggled to get through the first season of the US version, like I struggled to get through my grandmother's meatloaf. But we all have an opinion and at the end of the day, you like what you like.

My experience tends to show that American comedies don't do losers, non sequiteurs, sadness and poignancy or negativity very well. The clip of the American Tim is a good example of not 'getting it' as it was the chance happenstance of working in the same place that got him and Dawn together and his job was nothing to do with it never mind deserving of credit. The "character development" in the BBC Ghosts seems self-evident to me in the disclosure of their back stories. A prehistoric man has been on a long, long journey and can't expect to travel much further very fast whilst the relatively recently deceased corrupt politician moves, before our eyes, from completely self-serving to much more aware of and sympathetic to the worries of those around him. In real life the characters of people change slowly and sometimes not at all and what we call character development is just us gettng to know them better. I personally hnk the BBC Ghosts does this beautifully.

In terms of BBC’s Ghosts you commented on the lack of character development from the Ghosts as a negative. But as is more evident in Season 4 with Mary’s passing. Character development leads to the characters getting “sucked off”. Over the first 3 episodes we saw Mary get her final development as a character until she was complete enough to get sucked off. But we also see how it took her many many years with the help of Annie to get to that place. It’s also specified that you stay how you die. That may also relate to character development. You see how these ghosts who’ve watched history pass by should have caught up a little more with current things. But they’re still steadfastly stuck in the past. Thinking back to their own time alive. So we do see some character development, but it’s slow. Robin’s development has been so slow that he’s seemingly been around for many aeons and is still yet to be sucked off. We saw in the Christmas episode when Mike’s family came how Julian adapted to being with the baby and how he thought back to his own child. He grew, if only a little, in that episode. These little things happen over time. And we get to see small developments over the course of the show. It seems much more real, these things take a lot of time. The Captain after so many years still struggles to share his own story from the lifetime of ingrained shame he accumulated. Mary took several more centuries than that to talk about her Witch burning. And soon after that, she got sucked off. I’m interested to see how the American show handles being sucked off. Because with the quick character development and story lines you pointed out by comparison. Then what reason will they have when the first of them is sucked off. Mary’s reasoning was obvious. So when one of them is finally sucked off, a massive thing would have to happen first to warrant it.

I’ve only seen the BBC version and it’s ability to turn a normal relatable event (eg. Family coming to visit) into a funny engaging story through only the use of its main premises (there are ghosts and one of the living people can see them) is great. It gets its drama from that premise. It doesn’t introduce elaborate plots for each episode it’s simple yet very effective.

Yes. BBC ghosts is genius. Unique and very BRITISH. It wont be able to have been copied ever. Copied well that is

I'm a big fan of Ghosts, both UK and US versions. What is interesting, in real life, is the history of the location used for Button House. Despite Ghosts being devised and written prior to finding a location it turns out the actual history of Button House mirrors, almost exactly, the premise of the show. Amazing.

Aside from the bigger plot structure differences, I think the US version ( maybe US sitcoms in general?) feels more stagey- there is a clearer rhythm of set-up, punchline, set-up, punchline. Even though all the UK ghosts are caricatures as you say, there's a naturalism to how they interact- in fact I think a lot of humour comes directly from how these wild historical characters bicker and chat in a very normal everyday way.

I personally find that the American version explains everything too soon, rather than showing it and/or letting the audience figure it out. Like, they say Thor (essentially Robin) got struck by lightning within the first 10 mins. It was season 4 before we found that out in UK version. Why did the audience need to be TOLD rather than SHOWN? I found myself wanting to watch further with the UK version because I wanted to find out more about the characters. It’s a character piece, really. But with the US version, they just immediately state exactly what we could have found out. Like Flower stating she’s a polyamorous hippie druggie (nice stereotype there) within the first few minutes - for literally no reason. Why would an old lady want to know that much detail about your life? Essentially, SHOW don’t TELL :’) that’s the issue imo

I believe the fact that the characters in the British Ghost don't change is that their development is stopped when they die. How can you develop if you are no longer interacting with the outside world. They can't have any interaction that is their problem because nobody can see them, only other ghosts! In the American Ghosts (though I have never seen it) character development may be necessary as they don't have the vast historical background upon which to anchor the character in.

There’s something about the American show that feels insincere, the location feels false. It feels like later seasons of community

I'm glad to hear that somebody else likes the uk Ghosts, I came to it as the cast of this show came from the three series of my favorite uk show Yonderland

It's like watching a 70's sitcom when the actors just read the script with no emotion and wait for the canned laughter, also zero connection between the two main characters, nicely ruined USA

You make some interesting points about the character development in the US version. British comedy mainly uses the set character traits to find humour. Just think about the best around: Father Ted, The IT Crowd, Fawlty Towers and Blackadder, The characters come in fully formed and change very little. British series are much shorter per series/season. All of the above are 6-8 each so would not need characters to develop that much.

I think the main thing is just looking at who the show was made for. BBC Ghosts was generally speaking made for the British public when the American one was for, well, Americans. BBC Ghosts works because it works with our British humour and how we generally act as people. We're used to slower paced telly that builds up the characters over time, even if it is really slow. It's all very British with the humour and the emotions. People react to certain situations in almost a very British way like with the weird awkward smile thing we do. BBC Ghosts works because it works with our culture along with it having the iconic British cast. I think that's probably one of the main things about the series is just the actors alone. We all know them as kids or as parents seeing then on HH, Bill and Yonderland so this series is just another one of their funny sketches. Then im saying this with the fact the same would apply for American Ghosts. Its made for American viewers so appeals to their humour and life more. Also I see alot of things such as we don't know anything about the captain or that he shows no signs coming out but realistically it would've never been something that anyone of then would have discussed, even Julian who was the most recent Ghosts. Its realistic that the captain wouldn't be rushing to the idea of coming out. This was really long Jesus christ

I totally disagree that the UK Ghosts are just caricatures, as each of them has an episode dedicated to them to show their back story and that fleshes their characters out a great deal

BBC ghosts is obviously superior to the US version

The biggest issue between the US and UK versions of shows (Red dwarf, Inbetweeners, and god forbid Only fools and Horses to name a few, along with Ghosts) is best summed up by Stephen Fry, the average American usually wants these three part set ups, where as us Brits tend to have a more pessimistic mindset that leads into the characters often failing. We love to see ourselves, where as American tv caters more to the ideals of the American dream. At the end of the day, American and British humour is different, we're more self depricating, where as Americans tend to be more optimistic. Theres a reason why i can't watch more than 2 episodes of most US shows, because it comes across as cringey, and too optimisitic, where as British shows often have more subtle plots that are easy to relate to, take Fanny for instance, we see her as the overbearing out of touch, from a different time kind of character, but as we slowly learn of her backstory through the show, we learn that everything we see her as was imposed on her due to her own parents failing her. Or Julian, who we only view as the slimy politician and womaniser, but over time we learn he actually has a heart of gold and does genuinely care like when he helped calm down Mike's niece, and how he regrets never being there to see his daughter grow up.

I recently binged the American version after I've been watching the og for years and it's good when you don't compare it to the UK version! I found myself getting frustrated with how much the US version dumbed down jokes and how things didn't have much build up to punchlines! There wasn't much struggle or build up, the house was clean and they magically had the money to fix it.. I'm definitely a fan of the actors but just frustrated with the writing! I think the British is more realistic and subtle especially in character traits. The captain being gay wasn't something that slapped you in the face as soon as he opened his mouth but it wasn't unbelievable he also grew a lot but it didn't completely cure the decades of him living with ww2 mindsets (it took Mary a long while to learn to speak out against men and she was having daily lessons from Anne)

Characters do not develop because they are ghosts. They died and death cut their personal development. That is the point of the UK version. A classic.

I also noticed the difference in character development. However, I think it was a very deliberate decision on the part of the UK team to keep the characters stuck in their ways- it's kind of the point, as they have died, they just can't change. I think it's also partly because UK shows aren't written to go on and on forever, whereas US shows seem to look to continue their lifespan wherever possible.

I don't believe that the American version works out. The characters don't have the comfortable chemistry that the UK cast has. I know it has a fan base but I don't believe they are comparable.

I dont know if me being a Brit has anything to do with this opinion, but Fanny being Fanny, the Captain being the Captain ect makes a lot of sense is totally beoivable to me. The captain would never come out, Fanny will never stop being blunt and disrespectful, Pat will forever be a beacon of optimism. That is just fact to me and makes complete sense for their charcters

I love both the shows and can't get enough of it. But I will say the BBC version gives more in 6 episodes a season than the American version which does in I think 12 or so episodes a season. Mind you the American version is only on season two. Also the American version led me to the British version so it does have it's benefits. The BBC version does have flashbacks detailing the characters deaths and shows the different ideas Allison and Mike have for the house opposed to just weekly goofy scenarios the cast gets into in the American version.

a bit about character development id like to add is that in BBC ghosts, some of them have kinda already had their character development. for example mary, if youve seen the newest series theres an episode all about her and a ghost called annie, who helped her loosen up and speak her mind on things. then you have robin, who doesnt really change much mindset-wise or in personality but you can tell over the course of his stay as a ghost he has learnt a lot of things from popular culture etc

I didn't watch the video because I already know the answer. The answer is yes. Yes, they did ruin Ghosts.

They haven't given the ghosts charecter development as the whole point of them being ghosts, is that there still holding onto there old life, with them needing to grow as charecters and leave there old life behind them for them to move onto the next stage of the afterlife.

Why do Americans have to make American versions of everything, in England I’ve grown up with American shows and stuff, it didn’t bother me. Unless it’s just a culture thing but I dunno. I absolutely LOVE BBC Ghosts it’s my favourite show! I love the complex characters and the story it’s SO GOOOD!!

A friend of mine told me how, watching the US Ghosts, is like watching your kid's school play.... "Okay, it's my line now," "And next I'll come in with what I'm going to say," "Must be me next," "Oh, and what you've just said means I can make this really funny comment..." I'm afraid once you see it like that, you can't un-see it.

9 out of 10 times we try to bring Brit shows as an american version sucks a big one.

I love both versions for what they both have. I can’t even compare as they are both so different. I would LOVE to have a full on crossover so Alison and Sam could have an episode or 2 together working with Ghosts!

Yes, America ruined Ghosts. I only watch the BBC version. It has characters and character development. Each one we learn a little more about a character. And they infused actual history into the story.

Perhaps the difference is British culture versus American culture. Each is suited best for its own.

You are missing the elephant in the room regarding "character development". The show doesn't address it directly, but the huge question the show poses is "Why are these particular people stuck in essentially purgatory". Yes, it is funny as hell, but they don't shy away from showing the suffering of ghosts, their eternal life is a curse. That's why the characters don't change so quickly - if they did, they could be "sucked off" as Mary did. I hope they will develop this part of the lore further.

So glad you did this video - just finished the BBC version last night and thought for sure I wouldnt find any good (or any at all) videos about it. Loved it, loved all the characters, and thought I'd just kept forgetting the captains name until they made that joke about it and I realized no one knew his name :p

So weird. Why don’t they just play the British version here in the US? Like Top Gear? I do like the US version. But I’ve never seen the UK version and don’t know how to even see it. 😮

I do disagree that there's no change in the characters in British ghosts. When you look at the Captain in S1 Ep6 of BBC Ghosts, he is a lot more manipulative and opportunistic in how he interacts with Kitty compared to the latest Christmas epidose or the seaosn 3 episode where he helps her get through the struggle of never being able to have a picture with Alison. You can tell his demeanour is a lot softer and sympathetic compared to how he was scheming to stop them selling the house in season 1. I do agree that in a show that is much more focused on the characters than the plot, it can start to grate, but I think the way they deal with this (exposing new sides to the characters instead of having fulfilling arcs) is pretty good and true to format. I mean, we only learned Fanny had a whole menagerie in the latest season, when we find out she still visits their graves. It does make sense for the American version to have more substantial arcs because of the structure of the episodes demanding a story with resolutions that would feel hollow without and arc to tie in.

"Half of the main ghosts characters end up being from the 20th century" Just like half of the main ghosts characters in the BBC version of the show: Julian, Pat, Captain, and Lady Button.

I don’t dislike the CBS version, but I do still prefer the BBC version. It feels more refined, heartfelt and poignant. They’ve basically done more episodes of the Us version and I don’t actually care that much about any of the characters, they feel kind of cringe and overblown in a lot of ways. I love the most subtle humor of the BBC version, and typically British humor in general. US versions always feel dumbed down or that they have to basically say “GET IT” after every joke or story point, watching it after seeing the BBC version I just think… wow, American tv writers and networks think Americans are DUMB. Or that they’re targeting for the lowest common denominator which is not great. The biggest example of this is the Captain. Not only did they give him a “silly” name in the US version but they also Yassified him in a very modern way instead of how subtle the portrayal of the BBC captain is. We got a love story from both but the US version felt very forced and not nuanced at all. Instead of the viewer realizing the subtext in the Captains actions, the US version makes it a point to give him a whole coming out storyline right away while also giving him a very flamboyant portrayal. They didn’t even drag it out for a while to milk for story points later. US sitcoms can do this successfully (like in Always Sunny) but they have to be actually well written and deftly acted which I don’t think the US Ghosts is… tho I blame more of this in the writing. Why does Sasapiss speak perfect modern American English? I feel like they were too afraid to do something more realistic in case it came off as cartoonish or offensive but it’s just so strange in its actual execution. They could’ve done something more interesting and had him speak in his original language or something and have characters translate or just have subtitles and not explain why people understand him. SOMETHING besides sounding like a guy from 2022 The pacing to me is also insane in the US version; like why did we need to meet Fanny’s husband right away, AND have the captain get in a relationship, AND bury Thorfins bones, AND discover literally EVERY characters death story all in season 1?? Where does the writing room have to go after this? I also think it’s an interesting cultural study of Americans vs British in regards to what characters will play, or what the studios THINK will play. Allison and Mike are kind of aimless, don’t really have a direction or goal, they’re kind of fuck-ups in a lot of ways that were given a direction by inheriting the house. Samantha and Jay are both basically brilliant in their fields and have ambitions… it’s like US audiences won’t stand for main characters that aren’t good at their jobs or just aimless in general. They did the same to Michael Scott in the US office: he could be a bad boss but he has to be a good Salesman for us Americans to like him One thing I did find interesting in the US version was Samantha taking advantage of her powers outside her home, specifically to see if her mom was a ghost. The BBC version has kind of driven home that other ghosts are creepy and to be avoided but this kind of storyline fits with the US tone and is fun to explore. I think a big part of Ghosts is a theme of family and chosen family; Allison doesn’t have a family of her own except Mike and her in-laws, but the Ghosts become her family. Like, of course a character who has lost both parents might be curious to see if they could contact them again with this power.

Thank you for this! They’re both charming in their own ways, love them both.

How does this man have under 10k subs, I thought I misread 2.86k as 28.6k. You deserve way more, man.

TLDR, I do not agree with UK Ghosts not making any character development, they're subtle because they do not need to be in your face all the time like the US Ghosts. The US Ghosts are shallow. The portrayal of Isaac infuriates me. Sam has questionable IQ. I find US ghosts too busy and IN YOUR FACE with literally everything. Like the Isaac vs The Captain - Isaac was from the get go just living up to a stereotype of what a closeted gay man is like, while the captain had a long story arch where he came to term with himself and had a period of accepting himself. (The Isaac arch is what drives me most mad ngl). What I love about UK Ghosts is that the character arches are slow and more realistic and you can watch for years without being tired of them. Someone who does not develop at all throughout the entire show is the lead Sam (US version). She literally never learns anything and they're doing the same joke over and over again (*ghost says something shocking* "oh my goodness... oh sorry ehm that was not for you ... "). And the Ghosts never really learn either do they? They're all just talking over Sam and are so disrespectful an unlikeable. I don't agree with you that there are a limited amount of historical periods in US history (and that is strong coming from an European). They definitively could have spread it out more, and some how I feel like there are too many Ghosts that we are supposed to have an emotional attachment to (I don't, I instead find them all highly annoying). The US version also has a desire for all the characters to be highly likeable. They are so incredibly shallow that it could not even be called a kiddy pool. Like Trevor and Julian. Julian was a tory who died in a sex scandal and is absolutely disgusting really and does not have any redeemable features, but he is still likeable because he what .. GROWS. Trevor on the other hand, because it is US television, you can't make a political statement without blowing up the country (sorry irrelevant, but also relevant). They just have to make him redeemable by giving him a questionable death story "oh i gave my trousers to a friend who needed them"??????? Like... what?

The characters in the UK version do change throughout the series, they're just more subtle, but they are noticeable. Ultimately, these people are hundreds of years old and change is hard. But it's more about how you see the characters. You understand them and why they are the way they are. It's you getting to know them more than them adapting to your values and outlook. The are who they are. The us version is set in new York, which has enough history to pull out eight unique characters, similar to the UK version. You've the native americans, the English settlers and those who wanted independence, which could have provided some humour on its own, you could have had a Canadian from 1812, a blues or jazz musician, you had the hippy, someone from an '80s Hair Band, an Irishman. Unfortunately, american sitcoms stick to a 'formula', like you said, where British sitcoms just focus on the jokes and the 'lessons' or 'growth' the characters get isn't sort of, in your face moralising.

I don't think you get the characterisation of the British comedy as there as character development, which is happening, but it is taken over a longer path rather than giving everything at once as found in the US version. With the UK version instead of the character telling you something they show you a clip of the character's history. and often give subtle hints which can be more appropriate to the character. In the US version it seems to even out each character while the UK each character has distinctly different characteristics and styles of speech. The BBC are showing both versions of Ghosts and I quite like the US Ghosts, but the Original is a gem that is rewatchable as it packs so much more into each episode with its use of language and comedic timing. One gripe about the US version is the lack of use of the beheaded character. With regards to plot the original establishes the premise and each character better and makes you interested more and care more for each person. The US version simply races through things far too fast.

The claim that the US version of Ghosts is 'still finding itself' having just completed its first season, doesn't really carry much weight when you realise that the first season, which finished in April 2022, consisted of 18 episodes, (the second season being even longer at 22 episodes,) whereas by the end of Season 1 in the US, the UK version may well have then consisted of three seasons, but that consisted of only 20 episodes (including 2 Christmas specials.) Not a lot in it when you look at it that way, is there?

i watched the American show, and if I hadn’t seen the British version I would have no clue what was happening, it moves too fast with too little explanation, I had to watch it a second time to fully understand the premise and if it was different to the uk one. It just doesn’t give off the same vibes :/

You're good. This channel is going places. Watched two of your videos and agree with them wholeheartedly.

I love both the British and American versions of GHOSTS....why does it have to be a competition. Each have wonderful characters and plots. One of my favourite moments ..the line dancing sequence ....brilliant!!!

One year later, and it's still not forgotten.

I don't think I'll ever get over the US version of Kath & Kim, or the atrocious US Being Human.

Very interesting. Hadn’t thought about the vast size of the US being an issue for the concept before. It’s easy enough for a single location to represent the whole of British (or, at least, English) history - not so much for America I guess. You’re quite right that whilst the UK version has character revelation, the US show has the bigger number of potential episodes that it allows for character development to occur - or maybe the structure dictates that the development is necessary. And class issues are so pervasive here that I hadn’t really thought of them being at the forefront of the UK series - but, of course, they’re really at the centre of it. I like the US version, lots of good stuff in there - but it lacks the ensemble spirit of the original and kind of feels like what it is, a corporate venture making a competent copy of something personal and innovative.

I disagree…. I love the Original and feel the same about it’s American cousin! The characters are different enough to love em both!

I think I prefer the US version, only because it’s the one that I watched first. I only found out it was a remake after already viewing that one. I also may have been a little biased because Rose McIver stars in my all-time favorite tv show (iZombie) and I pretty much only watched the show for her. I still really enjoyed the UK version.

Plot vs “hanging out”… interesting observation, and I think a big part is in the uk we love word play, and humour through language so you don’t need a lot of’drama’ to make a good show. Also the nature of uk culture is more about not having conflict broadly.

Great video. You should consider doing one like this for Sherlock vs Elementary. They’re vastly different shows but I’ve always felt it clear that Elementary wouldn’t have happened without the success of Sherlock.

I actually love the CBS version of Ghosts.

One of the special things about the UK version is the cast. Particularly the Six Idiots who have been together since working on the BBC children’s history show Horrible Histories. They are also the writers and the their chemistry is brilliant

Me from U.K: UGH! American version? Do me a favour. Me from UK two seasons later: wonder when season 3 is coming out?

Is this a current or older show? It sounds so interesting, I need to check it out. Edit: I found the british version and am on the 3rd episode. Think I'm hooked already.

US leave the comedy to the professionals Also I think Britain’s comedic style is cultural. It’s straightforward, witty and yeah. Compare motherland and modern family, one of them uses obvious yet clever humor, and the other is people being annoying to each other. It’s the same with outnumbered

I know that the US version is endorsed by the The Six but it is awful. I watched a few minutes of the first show and hared it. I watched the episode with the guest appearance of Matt Baynton and it still sucked. The cast of the BBC Ghosts have been creating and acting together so long that they create shows that are seamless. Lolly Adelope, Katy Wix, Charlotte Ritchie, and Kiell Smith-Bynoe were inspired choices for the additional characters. I just don’t “feel” the energy in the American version.

Both of these shows were extremely well done and entertaining. If you cannot enjoy both series, I really feel sorry for you.

First, let me admit I'm someone who, if the American "Ghosts" came out first, I would have said it's stupid. But if the British made a TV show (which they did with "Ghosts"), I immedately would call it clever, witty and intelligently written. That being said, the American Ghosts grew on me, and they do deserve to be at ComicCon conventions. It's hard to adapt something to another country's sensibilities, but CBS/Paramount did it. Kudos to them. It's not, as you said, "I don't not like it", or something to that affect. But at the same time, I know I still would have glossed over it if there wasn't a British one first.

I don't think the lack of character development in the British version is a negative especially given how deliberate that is. The whole Captain Project William episode was teasing the obvious character developments you get in shows but then pulls the rug & reveals it as a blind. Character development is in most shows & ppl forget once you develop a character, say have the Captain come out & be more comfortable with himself then you have lost something from his character & essentially have to write him differently. What it does do in the US version is allows those characters to become different from the British versions though via on screen developments which can only be good for it, but it's not a negative that the British version doesn't have it.

I watched the bbc version first. When I first began the US version, I honestly didn’t like it. Especially the first two eps which were frame to frame similar and it seemed like they spoon-fed audiences, not trusting them to come to conclusions themselves. Also maybe because I absolutely adored the bbc cast. But then as I continued watching, once the plot was established they branched into their own worlds and the characters became their own , no longer shadowed by their counterparts. I genuinely enjoyed it. The stories delved deeper into each ghost’s backstories and the connections bt the ghosts themselves were explored further. I also like the couple here better. The husband is actually helpful and doesn’t let her do all the work. He gets things done and is also great at being a partner she could rely on. I loved that he had some connections n interactions with the ghosts too n not completely sidelined. And the protagonist is genuinely nice to the ghost. She doesnt always use the ghosts for her benefits unlike the BBC one. Honestly that couple was too selfish and dumb for me. They couldn’t have anything done without the help of the ghost. They almost died multiple times if not for the ghosts. I love this couple sm better. Though I love the ghosts in both versions very much. So I hope you all could also give it a try and judge for yourselves .

Ghosts follow a comedy style of resetting at the start of each new episode which is why the characters don't develop. Essentially it's a case of we have these caricature, now how will they react if this situation happened. An American example would be M.A.S.H which did it to an extent that although the war continued there was still Burms and Hulahan trying to instil disaplin but never managing it with the other undisaplined doctors- the characters didn't change or develope with the war, they reacted to situations. It sounds like there is more development with the American Ghosts and the story is more of a soap format?

I'm a Brit who loves both BBC ghost & ghost US.

The British version is my favorite. I prefer it over the American version.

I was never a fan of the original The office, so had no interest in the American remake. I've only just started watching the American remake and so far, not bad. However, the concept of developing the characters of dead people is a bit strange. How can there be continuation? I'm not sure the American version has legs. Studios have a history of cancelling shows that do not get the required audience viewing.

This is a really interesting video. Even though I love BBC Ghosts with my whole heart it is frustrating sometimes that the character development is somewhat restricted by the nature of the show itself. Its comedy comes from having a very strongly established, lively cast of characters with instantly recognisable character traits, like Thomas's crush on Alison, the Captain's insistence on rules and order, Kitty's unshakeable optimism. They have to keep those character traits otherwise the comedy wouldn't work. So it leads to situations where the character develops over the course of an episode but has to lose that development at the end. Like when Kitty learns that her sister wasn't as kind as she believed and there's a tense moment of realisation - which is then broken by her saying that oh well, at least she was nice the rest of the time. Or when the Captain learns to relax and not worry about rules over the course of an episode but snaps back into his old self at the end. It does get somewhat frustrating when there's an opportunity for a character to have a big fundamental breakthrough but it doesn't happen. At the same time, the show doesn't need huge character developments to pack emotional punches. A lot of the poignance comes from small, thoughtful, genuine moments in the midst of the silliness. And even though emotional moments in the show are often followed by punchlines, it's nice to be reminded sometimes that however serious things get, there's always room for a joke and a laugh.

I prefer the British originals having just watched the American version of ghosts it's okay. I like American Great aunt Hetty and I like the Viking. The cast in general are good. However I'm fond of our original. They are both watchable and fine. I'll watch both quite happily.

Considering how bad US adaptions of British comedy shows usually are, I think Ghosts US is one of the better ones. I just wanna talk about the best moment in the UK show, which was Julian putting a kiss on the end of Mike's email to his boss just before he pressed send. Even thinking about it makes me laugh.

As a Brit I have to say I really like the US version of ghosts and it's properly lol funny in places which I'm afraid to say most US comedies aren't . My only complaint is the British revolutionary soldier doesn't sound that British

Enjoyed this expository, thank you. The BBC Ghosts is a wonderful mix of brilliant writing and brilliant acting, which is a rarity. It’s easy to tell the writers are well-versed on their history, which makes sense as they did Horrible Histories. As an American, I know we can make great sitcoms, too. The Good Place, for instance; that was fantastic. That ‘70s Show and Friends, two forever favs. Etc. I fail to see why time and time again, American TV writers feel the need to take a fabulous British series and rework it. Call Me Kat in place of Miranda, for instance (the latter is another brilliant series.) I haven’t watched the American Ghosts and won’t because I have this thing where I will not watch American copies of British programmes (Life on Mars was the exception and that’s because I was unaware of the UK version at the time.) I tend to enjoy British TV writing more than American. Also Aussie writing, Canadian writing, French writing, etc. The Time of Our Lives is a wonderfully written, unfortunately shortlived series that I loved to the point that I had the boxset shipped over from Australia. The Family Law is another fantastic Australian series. X Company is a class Canadian series. Etc. But back to British programmes. Bottom line: it’s rare for me to discover a British series I don’t enjoy. Much less rare to discover an American series I don’t enjoy. Shame because history of any kind is my jam, but the American Ghosts doesn’t seem to be my cup of tea. I’ll stick with Outlander.

I think some of your points focus on the difference between UK & US comedies: in the US, the humour tends to be action-based, whereas in the UK it's less about action & more about the interaction between the characters. The US seems to value how the characters ACT, whereas in the UK it's more how the characters ARE. This is why some of the best British comedies have bombed in the US version, especially Coupling, one of the best British comedies ever imo which flopped very badly in the US. Most of the time in UK Coupling, the 6 characters are simply sitting in a pub or one of their houses talking. That doesn't really work in the US. Another factor is that US sitcoms seem to need a hero or someone who has a character arc, learning until he wins over everyone else or until he conquers something. In the UK, it's the character's weakness or flaws that provide the comedy, so these negative attributes are celebrated. Look at some of the greats in British comedy & they all have failings: Basil Fawlty in Fawlty Towers is inept, slightly deranged, angry all the time, & that's the cause of the humour; Frank Spencer in Some Mothers Do 'Ave 'Em, similar to Basil Fawlty, is inept & basically a complete idiot, but he's also very innocent & sweet-natured & adores his wife &, in later episodes, baby daughter, so we cannot help but love him; in Blackadder, Edmund Blackadder is selfish, mean, nasty, devious & full of unlikeable qualities, whereas his manservant Baldrick is the epitome of stupidity, yet we cannot help but love them. Blackadder is also one of the most unlucky men in British comedy as, no matter how grand his schemes, he always loses out; similarly in Only Fools & Horses, one of the UK's most loved sitcoms, Del Boy is a working class man with delusions of grandeur. He's a market trader, selling poor quality or illegal things & is full of dodgy deals, who dreams of being a rich man. In the US, the last episode would be him fulfilling all his dreams & becoming rich & set up for life. In the UK, he finally becomes a millionaire but then almost immediately loses most of his money, so he's nearly back to square one. The US would never have such losers as as Basil Fawlty, Frank Spencer, Blackadder & Del Boy & their heroes because that's not the American idea of a hero. The US prefers stories of hope, even in their comedies, whereas here in the UK our humour tends to be bleaker & blacker. Personally I feel that the US sitcom that came closest to the UK style was also one of their best: M*A*S*H. The characters all had positive & negative characteristics & they weren't always the heroes as they had significant flaws & sometimes lost. I've always been surprised that M*A*S*H was as popular as it was in the US but even then the sitcom was not as dark as the film version. Just my brief thoughts on the comparison between US & UK comedy.

Love the American Ghosts so much that I am trying to figure out how to watch the British series. Can’t get enough of the comedy and wild story lines.

I rolled my eyes when I heard about the Ameican version, but it really hooked me during season 2. At this point, I quit comparing them. I hope BOTH series continue on for a while. I hope they do more cross-over episodes with the casts.

😁You should be on Horrible Histories - the original show the troupe of BBC Ghosts originated! Brilliant comparative analysis! 🙌🙌🙌

The BBC series benefits from being an ensemble cast most of whom have been working together for many years. They also do the the writing. I think the other thing is that it's shot in the real house, not a studio. I have seen a little of the US version and it's not as bad as I thought it would be but it's too slick and lacks subtlety.

In general, English shows are comedy, American shows are gags.

Fantastic food for thought. I very much like both versions and I believe I like the US version specifically because it is starting to find another path. If they had just gone for a straight up retelling with watered down characters I don't think I would have enjoyed it at all.

I like Ghosts. I want to watch the British series too. On the American version, Pete and Thorfin are my favorites.

I genuinely nearly cried when I saw you guys messed with the six idiots. The office is definitely a huge outlier.

This is a great essay about both Ghosts series. I love both for different reasons. It is just like us to take steal something “make it better”. Like WW1 and Native American deaths.

I love the BBC show and as a European, who happens to be a historian, I was a tad scared when an American version was announced, but I must say that I was pleasantly surprised. It really is an adaption this time, not an americanised copy. The biggest difference is a viking instead of a caveman, which makes perfect sense. They could of written a Tudor character, for there were quite a lot of colonists in New England back then, but that would of looked a tad forced. The class system in the UK is very different and based on a variety of reasons, yet there is a class system in the US as well, albeit far simpler and less of a concern to people. I've heard that the French are going to make their own version, so I'm quite sure we will see ghosts from the french revolution, the 100 year war and probably inhabitants of the Lascaux cave, mais on verra bien. But apart from that I sadly have to agree on the main point, namely that US adaptations of European shows usually vacate the main premise of these shows by turning it into something more palatable for a US audience - which usually fails miserably. Anyway, I found this channel through that show and I will explore it more. Thanks for uploading.

We love both versions. They are similar and different which is fine.