Why do Britcoms have so few episodes compared to others?

I think that one of the major reasons is that comedy shows in the UK are usually written by one person or a duo. This generally means that the humour is quirkier because it comes from a single brain or friendship or brains, but then the material is necessarily less abundant; writing three hours worth of quality comedy material for a six-ep series is very hard work when you're on your own, writing thirteen hours worth and keeping up the quality might be considered well-nigh impossible.

When you have a large team of writers applying itself to the task, as is apparently common in the US, it's far easier to produce an abundance of material (hence the 26 ep series). To my knowledge, and I'm by no means an expert, this method has been used only once in the UK and we have famously ended up with a dreary never-ending poor-quality sitcom that should have been stopped several years ago.




Apologies for typos, this was typed with the help of two kittens, Lara and Oz.

To my knowledge, and I'm by no means an expert, this method has been used only once in the UK and we have famously ended up with a dreary never-ending poor-quality sitcom that should have been stopped several years ago.

Interesting... what sitcom are you referring to, by the way; It might be amusing to see that.

Typically, I adore the quality of Britcoms. Of the ones I like, they are so real and cozy-feeling to them. I can see how that would be difficult or near-impossible to replicate for so long.


I am the movies I love! (^_^)

I'm talking about "My Family" which was as bland as wallpaper paste, and about as hilarious, and was apparently axed a year ago.

Here's a quote from The Daily Telegraph which reported at the time: My Family has a large team of writers working on the scripts. Despite this Wanamaker and Lindsay (both highly respected) admitted in an interview in 2009 that they've occasionally refused to perform because the material was so poor. "Out of 100 episodes maybe we've done 10 that you can say are really good shows," said Lindsay.

Zoe Wanamaker, Kris Marshall and Robert Lindsay, who are all first class actors, must have been paid a monstrous sum to appear in it.

Apologies for typos, this was typed with the help of two kittens, Lara and Oz.

I think there's also the TV licence factor - everybody who owns a TV pays it (or is supposed to, the system is far from perfect as any uni student in halls of residence will tell you!) so a big chunk of funding comes from that, but because everybody pays it the BBC (and, I suppose, everyone else - the license is/was a BBC thing but effectively their thinking is, you either have one or you must be watching TV illegally) is really meant to try to divide their income from that to cover lots of different programme types.

So, for instance, it is a wiser move to make one six-episode costume drama, one soap and one six-episode factual series (i.e. Coast) and one six-episode comedy series than to just say they'll make one eighteen-episode comedy, because they're sort of obliged to cater for everyone. (Especially given that the license isn't popular with everyone.)

Or at least, that's my take on it.


"If we go on like this, you're going to turn into an Alsatian again."

I think there's also the TV licence factor - everybody who owns a TV pays it (or is supposed to, the system is far from perfect as any uni student in halls of residence will tell you!) so a big chunk of funding comes from that, but because everybody pays it the BBC (and, I suppose, everyone else - the license is/was a BBC thing but effectively their thinking is, you either have one or you must be watching TV illegally) is really meant to try to divide their income from that to cover lots of different programme types.

So, for instance, it is a wiser move to make one six-episode costume drama, one soap and one six-episode factual series (i.e. Coast) and one six-episode comedy series than to just say they'll make one eighteen-episode comedy, because they're sort of obliged to cater for everyone. (Especially given that the license isn't popular with everyone.)

Or at least, that's my take on it. IridescentTranquility, your reply to me was almost a year ago, but I have got to say that this is a most interesting reply! Wow, I never knew you in the UK pay a monthly bill just to own a TV and that that money goes to fund the TV stations! Do I understand right? If so, wow!

So, if the Brits pay to own a TV every month, does that mean that if they stop paying, they lose their TV (someone comes in and confiscates it)? Or, does it just mean that they no longer get TV programs, even though they get to keep the TV (in other words, it renders the TV useless)?

And, do Brits get any free channels, like we in America can get, on an antenna?

Please excuse typos/funny wording; I use speech-recognition that doesn't always recognize!

The TV Licence fee funds the BBC's TV, radio and internet services, none of which carry advertising. And yes, it's a per-household levy for every home that has a TV, and a long-time bone of contention in the UK between the pro- and anti-BBC lobby. You don't have your TV confiscated if you don't pay it, and neither do you lose services, but you can be fined.

However, the commercial networks like ITV, Channel 4, etc are funded in the standard way, by selling advertising space. And yes, in the UK there are dozens of free channels via your antenna. (But you still have to pay the licence fee, whether you watch the BBC channels or not.)

Make tea, not war.

Sweden has the same licence as the UK. Technically you are not allowed to own a TV withour paying it every third month. Our equivalent of BBC is called SVT. But we also have an equivalent for Channel Four: TV4. And I've never thought about this before, but our TV shows also tend to have fewer episodes per year than many American shows.

Intelligence and purity.

Sweden has the same licence as the UK. Technically you are not allowed to own a TV withour paying it every third month. Our equivalent of BBC is called SVT. But we also have an equivalent for Channel Four: TV4. And I've never thought about this before, but our TV shows also tend to have fewer episodes per year than many American shows. This is all very interesting! And I thank you all for replying to this thread, I've learned so much. I've been telling everyone that in the UK, you have to pay for a TV in order to even have one in your house. That's incredible to me, because here, in the US, we can only TV weather we pay for cable or not.

It's just so interesting how different things can be, in different places.

But I rather like the short seasons. I think it does lend a quality to the show, to not drag it on for too long.

Please excuse typos/funny wording; I use speech-recognition that doesn't always recognize!