Come back Ashes to Ashes, all is forgiven!

Glad to see that the 24 set is being put to good use during its hiatus.

Of course not, no this is the latest British TV programme to get the American remake treatment; Life on Mars! Unfortunately it has much more in common than sub-par spin-off Ashes to Ashes than the far superior Life on Mars. For starters it's almost entirely pointless, being a remake we know the answer to the "Am I mad, in a coma, or back in time?" and because the opening storyline is identical to that of the original we know what's going to happen, so why bother watching it? In fact, I'm not entirely sure what the point of this remake is, anyone in the U.S who wanted to see it would have bought the DVDs or caught it on BBC America.

Replacing John Simm and Phillip Glenister are Jason O'Mara and Colm Meaney as Sam Tyler and Gene Hunt respectively. And it's these two that are the other problems with this American remake.

For starters, Jason O'Mara is terrible, just terrible. He has all the acting style and charisma of a cardboard cutout of Matthew Fox and delivers his lines like a character out of Silent Hill and Resident Evil 5; "What's happening?" He only seems to brood or shout angrily, not unlike Keanu Reeves.

Colm Meaney though, is a competent actor. It's just a shame that, in this opening episode at least, injects none of the attitude or machismo to the character of Gene Hunt. The only moment at which he does break the 21st century police rules is when he beats up a woman. Yes, he beats up a woman. Something the original Gene would certainly not do.

And that's the final main problem, having Gene as a woman beater is the only thing they do different. The appeal to many with the original Mars was that it was much like having new episodes of The Sweeney back on the telly. If the makers of this new American remake had any balls, they would channel the likes of Starsky and Hutch to give it a proper American makeover. It has, however made me think I should give Ashes to Ashes another shot, and I will be watching the second episode just to see if they do anything at all different, after all the American version of The Office had a similarly dodgy first episode. But then they have Steve Carrell....we have Jason O'Mara who is just as funny, albeit for the wrong reasons.

Spin City

I've been watching a lot of Frasier recently, on account of having a lot of work to avoid and having the Paramount Comedy Channel in my room. Now, Frasier is perhaps the single greatest example of a spin-off; a completely different sort of show from Cheers, and running for the same time, it is a show that you can enjoy without ever seeing the original show from which it was er...spun(?) A shame then, that the most recent examples of the spin-off haven't quite learned this lesson; The Green Green Grass relies mainly on the fact you're only watching it because you want to see characters from the perrenial classic Only Fools and Horses. I can't think of one person who would watch it for any other reason. The CSI franchise depends more on the fact that people want to see the same grisly murders and forensic investigation in a variety of different locations, fair enough I suppose.

A desire to see favourite characters and the 'same thing, different place' are the problems that Life on Mars 'sequel', spin-off, Ashes to Ashes certainly suffers from.Say what you like about it's ending, but Life on Mars was a fresh, original take on the cop show. It gave us Gene Hunt, and a Camberwick Green episode about a nonce bashing. Then, unlike most shows these days, it knew when to wrap things up and answer our questions. Only it didn't, fair enough we knew that all of it took place in Sam's head, but they didn't let it lie. The BBC demanded more Gene Genie; and after a presumably short tone meeting they went: "Gene Hunt in the 80s?" and lo, we have Ashes to Ashes. Now, shows like 24 and Lost have annoyed me in the past, but I stick with them because I want to find out what the hell is going on. I have no such compulsion with Ashes, don't get me wrong, I fancy Keeley Hawes and I love Gene Hunt, but that isn't enough is it? We know exactly what's happened, she's in a coma and has taken Sam's characters into her consciousness...and Alex Drake doesn't let us forget it, constantly referring to everyone as constructs. If she knows what's going on, and we know what's going on, then where the hell is the entertainment? Oh, right, shallow "I Heart 1980's" style references to pop culture. According to Matthew Graham, there are answers about Gene Hunt, but surely the whole 'I read Sam's report and have taken those characters into my consciousness.' is answer enough?

"He came and went" F-nar F-nar

Remember this? Ah those heady early days of "Adult" spin-off Torchwood with it's "Nymphomaniacs from Space!" plotlines and casual but really forced use of the F-word. It's got better this year, but it's still not without its problems. Consistancy is certainly one of them, we only seem to be getting about 2 episodes in a row that are actually any cop. And I am starting to like and care about the characters, especially after this weeks Owen-centric episode, so I would probably watch it if it wasn't a spin-off from my beloved Doctor Who.

So what have we learned? That the spin-off relies on the familiarity with an aspect of it as a hook, but should really present you with something a bit different at the same time. This is of course hardly fresh and new insight, but the fact that Cleveland from Family Guy is said to be getting his own show, suggests that maybe TV Land needs a refresher course in spin-offs.