Why it’s that’s way I really fail to understand.

But here’s the question then: can European shows compete in the dubbed market with American ones? Or is the size of the US market so great that they can afford to take less money from overseas and price local production out of the cross-border market?

The differences in development budgets though, that’s an interesting explanation. I hadn’t thought of that.

Because it’s not about production budgets, but development budgets. A producer with a single hit show in the US can support a larger portfolio of trials than that is the case in Europe. That’s why the better concepts and scripts have more time to develop, I think. The time from concept to production is much shorter in Europe. I think this doesn’t become apparent in mediocrity, but it’s a sure way to make sure nothing overpolished and coceptually thought-through hits the screen.

And there’s also the issue that, until recently, no one in Europe ever really thougth about seriously licensing tv rights. There’s the occasional “Schwarzwaldklinik” and “Derrick” in Chinese, but as opposed to even the weakest US series, European producers simply did not take international syndication overly seriously.

Yes, it’s something like that. Felicitas Woll has this look that… in French, I’d have called it abordable. Totally hot, in the sort of sweet but confused girl-next-door sort of way that suggests she might actually sleep with a schmuck like you. It’s a very valuable trait in a young actress. I admit (a little sheepishly) that that was why I started watching. But the show actually is good on its merits, not just for its main actress.

“I’m not so sure your initial quote about “not being nothing” doesn’t also apply to the white trash you’re referring to. In fact, I’m not sure their situation is necessarily better if they feel similarly estranged from their societies without any clearcut scapegoat like religion or racism. In some sense, that does make them even more invisible.”

That’s exactly it. There could have been brilliant satire in seeing the two things in the same light: Needing to be somebody regardless of the personal cost as motive both for the things Americans do to get on TV, and the things terrorists do.

Yes, European reality TV is not very different from American reality TV. But look at Buffy, the Vampire Slayer, The Sopranos, Desperate Housewives, Lost… heck, even the CSI franchise. Where is the European equivalent? The Brits are doing better - British TV seems to have good shows to compare with Americans ones - but where I can I find a continental European program as engaging as any of the Americans ones I named?

Bad American TV and bad European TV seem comparable. But there is also really good American TV. Now, having only just in the last few weeks discovered Berlin, Berlin, I can name exactly one show as good as America’s best.

I realize that money is one of the issues. Even the largest single language European markets are smaller than the global Anglophone market by a large difference. But except for CSI and maybe Buffy, none of those shows relies on terribly high budgets for stunts and effects to work. Comparable programs could be made in Europe. Why aren’t they?

that’s a very popular opinion, apparently. I’ve never seen it, but I’ve received praising emails from French friends who seem to have fallen in love with the show, or Felicitas Woll for that matter ;).

About the film: I’m not so sure your initial quote about “not being nothing” doesn’t also apply to the white trash you’re referring to. In fact, I’m not sure their situation is necessarily better if they feel similarly estranged from their societies without any clearcut scapegoat like religion or racism. In some sense, that does make them even more invisible.

However, the 15-minutes-fame thesis, has for all its intuitive merits, also a lot of holes. Still, it’s been recently been awarded a little more attention as Hans-Magnus Enzensberger published a treatment about “the radical loser” (in English via signandsight.com - http://signandsight.com/features/493.html)

In fact, just last Friday, there was a conference about “victims and losers” in Berlin about this (http://www.einstein-forum.de/index.php?id=521&L=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=24&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=505&cHash=84e466bb6a).

I’m still gonna watch AmericanDreamz though. I found the trailer a couple of weaks ago and I loved the scene where the white trash girl is breaking up with her boyfriend because… “your life is here… and my life is like… wrooom!”… girls

Absolutely, mass consumerism will be mass consumerism. Also, buying broadcasting rights to foreign (often American) productions is way cheaper than producing your own stuff. And, in general, American movies ‘look’ good because of the big budgets.

As to context and subtlety, some stateside products are simply not fit for foreign markets because they are so US oriented. Take for instance the movie “Damaged Care” about the American healthcare system that I had to translate a few years ago. That one was so specific that I still wonder why somebody in Europe decided to broadcast it here. I really struggled to make this movie understandable to a non-US audience.

On the other hand audiences in Western Europe have been watching American productions for ages and have, at least unconsciously, acquired quite a big amount of American popular culture. There is some room to maneuver.

But in the end it is about the bottom line. And that I can understand too.

As to the quality of European domestic tv, well, just look at Endemol. You have American Idol and we have Star Academy. We really do not differ that much.

One of the things I’ve noticed here is that the American films and TV shows that are the most widely viewed in Europe are the ones with the least novel or interesting content. My working hypothesis is that subtlety and context don’t translate easily and that European audiences, like Americans ones, respond better when they don’t have to think too much. The kinds of American films that make more overseas than domestically are special effects films with pitiful plots and scripts, or simplistic movies that act as vehicles for known stars. I think the studios are responding to this.

American TV, in contrast, has gotten a whole lot better in the last 5-10 years. TV networks do make risky shows with actual content. But American cinema seems empty.

I’m quite disgusted at the state of domestically made European TV (although Berlin, Berlin dubbed in French is forcing me to reconsider German TV). And I can’t take the wife to films that aren’t in English, so I never get to see locally made movies. I hope local films are better than what Hollywood is doing these days.

I can’t account for Ebert’s review either. There are a few other American reviews in the same vein. Maybe it’s just that in Europe, I’m forced to explain that Bush isn’t stupid to people who firmly believe that he’s just a “clueless puppet” of the oil industry, while in the States perhaps the idea that the President is an idiot is still novel to some people.