ONLY FOOLS AND HORSES “TO BE REMADE FOR THE US”Home by Pete Moore January 29, 2012 14 1 min 10 yrs Tweet Good grief. What’s is this madness? You don’t ‘remake’ genius. Remaking Only Fools and Horses is like trying to repaint a Rembrandt. It cannot be done. Either broadcast the original or don’t bother with it at all – Click to rate this post![Total: 0 Average: 0] Comedy Crazy World Post navigation Previous postNext post 14 thoughts on “ONLY FOOLS AND HORSES “TO BE REMADE FOR THE US”” Usually they don’t work in cross-over, but when they do they are gems: Steptoe & Son becoming Sanford & Son, Till Death Do Us Part becoming All in The Family and The Office becoming The Office. My god is smacked. I had no idea Steptoe and Son and Till Death Us Do Part were remade for the US. Come to think of it, that might account for Ron Paul’s years away from Washington. Someone had to play Albert Steptoe and Alf Garnett … Good one. Of course any US remake will be much better. The original was made by government bureaucrats with money looted under violence of all from the productive classes. The free market will provide a much superior product. violence of law Excellent FO. Look forward to Pete’s response to that. Some remakes and adaptations do work quite well. I think the trick is for the adapters to understand the original well enough to see what they need to keep and what they need to ditch. John Cleese claimed on a talkshow that there have been several unsuccessful American versions of Fawlty Towers including one where the executives decided to cut out the “Basil Fawlty” character… But some of the best films ever have been reworkings of earlier films- the Magnificent Seven and A Fistful Of Dollars were both derived from Japanese films for example. Just imagine how ‘Trigger’ would be renamed? Wasn’t there a British remake of Who’s the Boss?starring Paul McGann? “I think the trick is for the adapters to understand the original well enough to see what they need to keep and what they need to ditch.” I don’t think it works with comedy Ross. Comedy is very much “of its time” and reflects current social trends and attitudes. That’s why Tony Hancock and many others were so popular in their time. They reflected the dreariness of post war Britain. I don’t think you could make a new version of Fools and Horses work now. There is precious little to laugh about! Haven’t you noticed the long absence of quality sitcoms? Everything has become too PC, too earnest and dare I say..grim. “The original was made by government bureaucrats with money looted under violence of all from the productive classes.” BBC bureaucrats made Only Fools and Horses? I don’t think so. However, BBC bureaucrats did reject it at first and tried to have it cancelled after the first two series. Apparently the viewing figures weren’t high enough, suggesting that even with its “unique” funding model they were then chasing ratings. John Sullivan, the genius who wrote the scripts, was inspired to create the show by Minder over on commercial ITV. The BBC then has the cheek to pump out a load of DVDs about this gem of a “BBC comedy”. I don’t think you could make a new version of Fools and Horses work now. True, Agit. Whites have been ethnically cleansed from Peckham so it would have to be set in leafy suburbs. I don’t think it works with comedy Ross. Comedy is very much “of its time” and reflects current social trends and attitudes. That’s true. Most ancient Greek comedies are dire, as are Shakespeare’s. Things that were considered hilarious 50 years ago may get no more than a wry smile now. That said some humour does last if the taboos and attitudes being sent up are still there- I’d say Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” still works 300 years later for that reason. For this reason I reckon something like “The Life Of Brian” will probably still be watched 200 years from now because Christianity will still be around. “Most ancient Greek comedies are dire, as are Shakespeare’s.” I am glad you said that Ross, you being eddicated and all. Noel Cunningham always manages to make me feel guilty because I fail to appreciate the greatness of Shakespeare. I had always assumed that people didn’t really enjoy Shakespeare; they just enjoyed the kudos that came from memorising it…… 😉 And yes, subjects which are quintessentially human for example will always raise a laugh or a nod of recognition. I love Laurel and Hardy because you will always find friends kinda like those two, or Charlie Chaplin as the little man. “Modern Times” is a classic. Comments are closed.