Almost twenty four hours later I am still unsure what to make of the US version of Kath and Kim. So here are a few random thoughts.

Both Molly Shannon and Selma Blair were far too traditional Hollywood good looking to live up to the grotesque feminine aesthetic that was so beautifully realised in the Australian original. Jane Turner’s frizzy perm serves an important comic purpose but Shannon’s flick do was just a little too contemporary. While I realise comparing the US to the Australian version is about as useful as comparing a film with the book on which it is based, translations work best when they maintain the spirit of the original. There were glimpses in last night’s program but not enough to really warrant the remake. However, Kath was nicely drawn in many ways, but the Kim character was very weak and not nearly as effective as Gina Riley in the Oz version. A glaring absence was the character of Sharon. For I think what is so special about the Australian program are the scenes where Kath, Kim and Sharon would riff off each other, with their idiosyncratic turns of phrases….this is a comedy of language as much as it is a comedy of visual humour, and this didn’t come through in the American remake. There was potential in the “Kel” character now renamed Phil with a gourmet sandwich business at the mall, but he wasn’t given enough screen time to really develop. Whether that comes in time is yet to be seen (although the previews for next week’s episode didn’t get my hopes up). And the “Brett” character (here renamed Craig) was not nearly enough hangdog and downtrodden. Both he and Blair were far too OC beautiful. Australian Kath and Kim is as much about the cultural politics of everyday living in the Australian suburbs as it is about anything else. This didn’t come through in an American sense either….are they shying away from this kind of comic political commentary? Most likely.

They tried I guess…but not hard enough it seems.