User Reviews

One of the problems with remaking a previous hit, is that it sutomatically invites comparisons. They tried to do everything exactly the same; same type of building, same type of characters, same type of situations, and here, Payne falls short. No surprise at all. It's not that Payne's actors are poor, but they aren't the originals, nor have the comedic timing of the originals. On it's own, not a terrible show. It has it's funny moments, such as when Mo responded to Payne's sentence 'We're going to make love now', and then the pause, 'So get out', and Mo said 'thank you for finishing the sentence'. Like many other shows, this one fails mostly do to poor casting. Larroquette can't do 'Fawlty'. He's funny, but he can't be that character. And once you've seen Cleese at it, well, perhaps no one else can. JoBeth Williams? Nope, nope nope. Not right for the character. Rick Batalla did well as Mo, but the rest were awful. The only hope is, no one will try to duplicate Fawlty Towers again. It's been 22 years now, and hopefully we'll never see that mistake tried again. Five/ten stars, because it's watchable. But that's about it. The commercials in this American version just rips apart any continuity in what little comedy there is in the show.

I only just discovered the existence of this obvious misfire. The casting and writing doomed it from the start; it simply takes a higher-powered production to stand up to the standards set by the original, and Brit-to-US conversions can be especially tricky. A glance at the first episode on YouTube is telling; virtually every line is followed by intrusive audience laughter, I assume canned. The viewer has no opportunity to judge whether it's funny or not, and for me it makes the show too irritating for its limited merits to be appreciated. Full of commercials too, just as it was aired.

Of course the success of a 'Fawlty Towers' redo rests primarily on the central character of Basil (or Royal etc.). Too-likable Larroquette couldn't approach the mastery of Cleese, with his endearingly detestable Basil's capacity for crazed malevolence and loony desperation, along with that certain edgy spark. But as Executive Producer of 'Payne', John L. Footed the bill and could cast himself in the main role and call the shots. For my money, the John who would have come closest to the mark would be John Lithgow-- the flavor wouldn't be the same (couldn't be and shouldn't be), but still pretty darn zesty!

Now, where to go with the rest of the cast... how to work up that special chemistry? Well, when in doubt, go after Saturday Night Live or SCTV graduates, or for that matter 90s talent from Mad TV or In Living Color. In other words, more players with sketch comedy experience, many of whom would have the chops to make the jump to successful sitcoms and big screen careers. Ah well, all wishful thinking at this point. Far better to come up with a fresh concept than invite negative comparison with past brilliance.

This really ought to qualify as one of the worst television shows of all-time, no kidding. Right up there with Supertrain, The New Odd Couple and all the others in that elite category, that rarefied air. And the fact that it's a cheap knockoff of John Cleese's masterpiece Fawlty Towers isn't even the issue. The jokes and situations are hardly original and the characterizations are downright awful. I actually felt embarrassed for Larroquette, who I think is one of the most underrated comic actors in the world. Granted, he's no Cleese, but he's not that far below him, either. JoBeth Williams was just terrible, as are the Polly and Manuel ripoff characters. It's just plain tasteless, lame and stupid. That Larroquette's character on the show is actually named "Royal Payne" should give you an idea of the intelligence level involved in the humor. "Night Court" and the fabulous "John Larroquette Show" have this turkey beat eight ways to Sunday. An absolute piece of garbage. 0 * out of 4

While all three versions (1978 - Snavely, 1983 - Amanda by the Sea, 1999. Payne) flopped, this first one is the best of the US ones. But none of them are able to capture the je ne sais quoi of the original UK John Cleese's Fawlty Towers, and just end up looking contrived. Good as Bea Arthur is with comedy, her character is all wrong for the role of a female John Cleese in her Amanda by the Sea, which ends up being a replay of Maude. Betty White fares better as the wife, but still the interplay with Harvey Korman just doesn't capture the requisite essence. Payne was just painful.

All four versions are on YouTube - worth a watch.

I think that it was an excellent rip off. John was twice the Basil that Cleese was. Sure Cleese was first and for purists the only one but J.L. was to say at the least exceptional. No one would ever have the guts to try this again but I wish someone would carry it on.I think the only thing that could possibly make it funnier would be to combine the two. Have the Fawlty towers gang do one show and then Payne do the next, then combine the two casts for a final show. Alternating Basil and Royal, What could be funnier. Mix the two casts for some real guffaws. I would like to know if Payne is available on DVD, I have Fawlty Towers and could only imagine watching the two side by side. If you have never seen Payne,,,,,,,imagine Royal and Constance Payne even the names crack me up. Love it for what it is, an absolute rip off thats just as funny and sometimes funnier that the god of comedy, John Cleese

The US has a history of lifting successful comedy formats from the UK, some of which have proved as successful - and occasional more so - than the original templates. Steptoe and Son became Sanford and Son, Till Death Us Do Part begat All in the Family, Man About the House mutated into Three's Company. Payne is not one of those shows.

Much as the US version of Coupling appears to have surgically sliced out the sex and sarcasm which made the original so funny, the team behind Payne seems unable to grasp that none of the characters in Fawlty Towers are meant to be likable, with the possible exception of Polly. Basil acts superior but has deep insecurities, Sybil is a self- centred bitch, Manuel is an idiot, even the guests are barely coherent.

But that's what makes them human. And funny. And whilst we bemoan the fact that Cleese & Booth produced only a dozen episodes of Fawlty Towers, we can sit agog that Payne made it as far as nine.

This show is no where near as good as Fawlty Towers, first off John Larroquette is no where near as good as John Cleese. Royal actually likes his wife, where is the hatred that was shown between Basil and Sybil? The maid- nothing compared to Connie Booth. While it is sporadically funny, I cant help think of Fawlty Towers whenever I watch.

Really. None. A poor rip-off of Fawlty Towers but without the charm (or the Cleese) of the original. It's a testament to bad taste that more than one episode was made. If you see this in the listings, do yourself a favour and avoid it like the (bubonic) plague - you can use the time to pull your fingernails out instead (it'll be more enjoyable).

Suppose you`re an executive of a TV company and a producer runs in saying " Hey let`s rework FAWLTY TOWERS and set it in America " What would you do ? I think the more humane amongst us would sack the producer on the spot , while the less humane would decapitate him for having an idea so bad it borders on the psycotic . I doubt if anyone would say " Hey what a great idea , lets do it "

PAYNE isn`t as bad as it could have been , the worst thing they could have done is copy the scripts word for word and hope for the best, but it`s still a bad sitcom. Royal and Connie Payne love each other and it`s revealed Royal is a great lover not something that can be said about Basil Fawlty who we can believe hasn`t had sex for many years. So you see the character interaction of Sybil and Basil is missing as is the class obsession and sarcasm of Mr Fawlty which made him one of the most memorable people in television history . There`s a bellhop who `s Mexican which means he can speak Spanish and is a Manual to Royal Payne`s Basil Fawlty and that`s about the only half decent crossover from the Cleese/Booth masterwork . PAYNE is only worth watching for the novelty value

The opening credits mention that it is based on Fawlty Towers. Apart from being based in a hotel run by husband and wife, I think that that is about it. You might as well say that "Four Weddings and a Funeral" is based on "Get Carter", as they are both set in England.

Where is the animosity between the hoteliers? Where is the violence against Manuel? Why is nothing funny? How come everyone is nice to the customers and the odds aren't stacked against them?

"Payne" is not "Faulty Towers", and it suffers because of the obvious comparison. While "Payne" may have its occasional moments of amusement, it is a sanitized, cliched and overall dimmer relative to the original British series, that sparkled so brightly with wit and comic timing. Let's face it, John Laroqette is no John Cleese. Not by a long shot...

John Larroquette is delightfully rude and self-serving as hotel owner Royal Payne in this Yank version of "Fawlty Towers"! Certainly, his version of crass attitude is different from John Cleese's, as it should be. Some viewers might say that the relationship between Payne and his wife Constance (JoBeth Williams) seems too flexibly forgiving, but there IS a definite viper-like chemistry between the two, like a more sarcastic Nick & Nora Charles. I also like (even though it is a comic-relief ethnic stereotype) Rick Batalla's portrayal of Mohammad, the bumbling bellhop. Just like Manuel in "F.T.", he is cringingly subservient to his boorish boss ... I'm waiting for a dressing-down scene of "This Royal's wife. This Royal. This smack on head." And Larroquette will give Batalla a smack on the head ... let's wait and see!