Is there a good English cop show called Life on Mars, you Americans gonna make an US version... 
What's wrong with the English version...? 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0787490/

The link to the official site of the UK version.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/lifeonmars/

And here's a trailer;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZYOD_W6dwI&mode=related&search=

Good trailer, though about the only dialog I truly understood was when he said "I need my mobile" (I assume this means cell phone???).

I can certianly understand the US remaking Life on Mars because:

1) It was brilliant (so a good starting point)
2) Half of the popularity was the cultural references to the 70s. In the US the cultural references will be totally different and half of the stuff in the UK program wouldn't gel with a US audience because they won't have the same experiences as people in the UK did. Whether or not this means some of the plots will have to change out of all recognition and lose out in the process is yet to be seen!

I do agree remakes are rarely as good as the original in pure terms but in some cases they are better for the intended audience.

P.S. Yes, Calidain, the UK for "cell phone" is "mobile phone", most usually abbreviated to just "mobile"... actually another reason for US remakes; the UK tend to know the US slang/terms for things even if they are different than the UK ones since we watch a lot of US films and TV. The US don't see that many UK films and are thus less familiar with the UK terms for things and may be put off watching a program which uses them widely.

The Office is a rather good make-over [as, BTW, is the German version Stromberg].

Hopefully David Kelley gets it right; I can already smell the Karl Malden and Mannix references ...

American film and TV production is run on profit. There are a few companies whose purpose is to create art, but even they must show a profit to afford to make a second film or show. Canadian TV/film is partially financed by the government, as is UK TV (and perhaps the UK film industry as well), allowing them to be a little less concerned with profit over creating high quality programming.

Creativity costs money, copying/remaking cost less. Smaller costs means a possibility of greater profits. Stars make box office draw, rarely do writers' names. Therefore, a film is more likely to get greenlit when there is a box office proven actor attached to it than a highly regarded writer. Even the best screenwriters get rewritten by script doctors and committees. Scripts written by committees tend to be as creative as business reports written by committees, and therefore sink profits.

The most recent issue of Newsweek poses photos of four actresses: Reese Witherspoon, Halle Berry, Julia Roberts, and Nia Vardalos. The headline on the article asks, "Which Actress Made A Movie That Grossed Over $200 Million?" The point being dozens of actors have earned way more than $200 million in films they have starred in, but only one actress has ever starred in the one and only such film which grossed more than $200 million. Films starring women tend to be dialog driven, rather than action driven (despite the Alien series and the Lara Croft flicks). So films with little dialog and lots of action get made. Remakes get made. Special effects have more to do with profit than any writing, understandible plot, or subtlety or nuance.

Films from countries other than the USA are filled with wonderful creative moments. It's cheap for Hollywood to remake them, adding box office boffo while they're busy appropriating other ideas. It's not new, sometimes it works, mostly it doesn't... but it tends to be profitable.

So do you know which of those four actresses starred in the only film starring a woman which earned more than $200 million (actual dollars, not adjusted for inflation) gross? The star of "My Big Fat Greek Wedding". Despite being a film from the USA, the film was shot in Toronto, Ontario, and Chicago, Illinois. Toronto's Ryerson University and Greektown neighborhood feature prominently in the film. Despite its writer being from Winnipeg, and the use of Toronto for location shots, the movie was set in Chicago. It costs too much for many films and TV shows to be shot in the USA, so many are filmed/taped in Canada.

If anyone wants to see a clip, I posted one on page three of the YouTube thread.

I have no problem with a remake like this, as long as it isn't dumbed down. What was great about the UK version is the complete and total absence of political correctness. Sexism, racism and a few other ism's all put to good use. By having a central character be regularly appalled at the behaviour around him, they got away with loads. Also, the story and in particular the ending was very subtle and ambiguous.

And in the UK it ran for two series, about 16 episodes. I don't think the story would work dragged out over a typical 23 part US series. I might be wrong, but the UK one was just the right length.

We're also to be subjected to a remake of The IT Crowd.

Because obviously tech jokes don't fly as well on this side of the pond. (Perhaps it's the 220V power vs. 110V?)