The other day in class we were talking about potential remakes of both Misfits and The Inbetweeners, and I started thinking about where these shows could go if they wanted to appeal to the same demographic that E4 and ITV2 are aiming for. It turns out that MTV is going to be attempting an Inbetweeners remake sometime in the near future, despite their lack of success in adapting E4’s Skins for an American audience. As soon as that option was mentioned, there was an audible groan in the class, as if putting the show on MTV was basically assurance that the show would be terrible. But again, if not MTV, where else would a show like The Inbetweeners fit in?
For a show like Inbetweeners, featuring a primarily young, male cast, one might think the show belongs on a channel like Spike TV, Adult Swim, or Comedy Central. However, I think this would be very limiting for the show. It was quite successful for ITV2 because it attracted a young female audience in addition to that male demographic. If it were put on one of the aforementioned channels, people would be quick to peg it as a “boys show” similar to Spike’s Blue Mountain State, Comedy Central’s Workaholics, or Adult Swim’s Robot Chicken. The same problem would exist if it were put on young skewing channels like ABC Family or The CW, since those tend to skew towards young women. To be honest, in the current American TV landscape, MTV might just be the best choice. The channel skews female, but has had recent success with male skewing shows like Beavis and Butthead. Because of the behemoth that is Jersey Shore, the channel has managed to attract both genders to their various shows. In addition, MTV seems to be attempting to commission shows of higher quality these days. Their summer show Awkward showed up on numerous critics’ “Best of 2011” lists, so it shows that MTV is capable of producing shows that are both popular and critically acclaimed.
However, this brings up the real issue with the current American cable landscape. Channels have become so fragmented and niche-specific that it would be nearly impossible for a remake like Misfits or The Inbetweeners to reach a mass youth audience. They could reach a mass audience on the broadcast networks, but then the shows would probably have to be tweaked to appeal to an overall mass audience rather than a young mass audience. I know The CW is looking to overhaul its image with its new president of programming, so it would be interesting to see if the channel decides to go after both young women and men instead of just young women. If that were to become the case I feel it would be the perfect place to put remakes of shows on E4 and ITV2, since the channel would have the resources to really do the show justice.
I’ve spent a lot of time actually thinking about where these shows would fit in the American television landscape. Since Monday, I’ve already watched nearly two series of The Inbetweeners (yes, I should have been doing homework instead). The more I watch, the more difficult I think it is to actually find a suitable home for it on American television, despite what I said on Monday.
In direct response to your thoughts on target audiences, I agree completely with your breakdown. However, I don’t think The Inbetweeners or Misfits like this could ever make it on broadcast television. Because of the much stricter FCC regulations, both shows would have to be so watered down in terms of content and especially (obviously) in language. While somebody could argue that you could take the language out of these programs without losing their essence, I disagree. The colloquial nature of these programs is what gives them their credibility and allows an easier connection for viewers. That’s a vital aspect, in my opinion, that you wouldn’t get on network tv, and possibly for the valid reasons you brought up with the other cable channels.
Maybe shows like this just don’t FIT in American television because of the different structures of the medium. Perhaps we just need to realize that there are massive differences between American and British television and that not every program can be exported to the other.
I completely agree with Chris on this. While I think Pat is totally spot-on in pointing out that these shows really need (and should have) a wider audience that most of our niche-channels can cater to, I think Chris’ point about the limitations of our network stations would dilute the content of the shows too much to stay true to their purpose.
I mentioned “Skins” in class the other day because it’s one of my favorite shows, and because I am more familiar with it than “Misfits” and “The Inbetweeners.” Based on what we watched of the latter two and my own personal experiences with “Skins,” I think the language and racy or “adult” content are integral to each of the shows. In Britain, these aspects of the shows aren’t sensationalized to bring in larger youth audiences. Rather, they are tools to provide a truly honest and bare portrayal of the lives of young people.
From what I’ve read about “Skins,” there have been some complaints from certain groups about the sex, drugs, alcohol and general bad behavior of the teens on that show. However, most of the comments and reviews I’ve come across admire the show for trying to tackle the problems that young people face very honestly.
“Skins,” “Misfits” and “The Inbetweeners” seem like they would lose that really great exploration of youth if they lost the racy content. What would be the point, then?
I point to something like “Gossip Girl” which, regardless of how enjoyable or good it is or is not, does not the real life issues of growing up. The sex, drugs and bad behavior on that show seem far more like a plot device and a tool for sensationalizing the show and drawing in viewers than what these British shows are trying to do.
Maybe I’m giving the Brits too much credit, but it seems to me that what makes those shows so good is how brutally honest they can be. While The CW might hit a broader audience than MTV or even an Adult Swim of TBS could, what the shows would lose in translation wouldn’t be worth the cost.
This is a tough question to answer. I took a look through a list of cable channels on Wikipedia just to try and spur some more ideas. I came to mostly the same conclusions you did Pat. However, I think that the shows would best fit onto a Comedy Central, at least The Inbetweeners. Because it’s a little bit more colloquial as Chris says, the content would fit most closely with Comedy Central. Likewise, Comedy Central is a part of MTV Networks, so the show could be moved over to MTV down the line or in the very least be advertised easily on MTV, Spike, even Nickelodeon (perhaps most specifically the TeenNick channel).
I think Misfits needs to go on a show that’s more universal in gender targeting. Misfits would fit on CW. I know it’s more commonly a female targeted audience on CW, but you make a good point that the new president could look to bring in different programming that would broaden the audience. Misfits is a little too edgy for ABC Family, although it could fit on the channel, if it were edited for language and such (more so than CW respectively – or more than The Inbetweeners would be on Comedy Central).
I also thought of TBS as possibly being a channel to put the shows on. It would definitely be a different approach for the channel, but could be an interesting addition to their lineup. I think The Inbetweeners would fit better than Misfits in this case.
I think you bring up a good point that the TV landscape is becoming more niche-oriented rather than applying to a wide base. Isn’t the point of having programing that pushed boundaries to have it be somewhat thought provoking? How is that going to happen if they only people that tune in are people who agree with the message that’s being presented not just in one show, but all of the programing on a niche channel? To me, this is the downside of these niche networks. Its excellent to appeal to a certain audience or demographic with a specific kind of programming. “Misfits” was successful on E4 because it appealed to its target audience. But, it would probably not have been as successful on something like Channel 4 where the audience is broader. Is it more important to try and reach a broader audience with programming or to find a nice place to settle and only appeal to your niche audience?
It seems like we’re getting the point where we will only tune in to certain channels and ignore most of what is going on outside of that. The niche channel threatens to take the variety out of TV watching. I think that some specificity is good. You wouldn’t want an episode of “The Inbetweeners” leading into “Downton Abbey” (I doubt that the same audience would stay tuned in for both) but at the same time having a line up of shows that are all the same doesn’t do much to broaden our interests.