The US Inbetweeners premiered last night on MTV - now that all the fuss has died down a little, how does the finished product stand up in the cold light of day? Well... it's not terrible. But - currently - it's not great either.
So memorable were the central performances of Simon Bird, Joe Thomas, James Buckley and the aforementioned Harrison in the UK series that much of the focus is going to be on how the new boys measure up. And to be honest, they're a mixed bag.
The Yank version of our hero Will, Joey Pollari, is fine but comes across as a little bland - his UK counterpart was famed for his frenzied histrionics and impassioned rants and without these, Will is just a bit dull.
Zack Pearlman arguably has the hardest job to pull off - the original Jay being such an inspired comic creation - but out of our lead foursome, he actually comes off best. The main point in his favour is that Pearlman's tubby Jay is different enough from Buckley's that comparing the two seems like a pointless exercise.
As Simon, the amusingly named Bubba Lewis does a fair job, but - and this is more a criticism of the show's casting directors - he's way too good-looking to play a socially inept nerd. When Joe Thomas struggled to woo Carli, we bought it - no offence, Joe. Here, it's far less believable.
The weakest link is definitely Mark L. Young, who is simply not as strong a performer as his co-stars. Transforming Neil into a dopey stoner for a US audience was a canny move, but Young's delivery is often flat, wooden and uninspiring.
And before anyone suggests that it's unfair to compare these US newbies to the UK cast, it should be pointed out that MTV's Inbetweeners invites unfair comparison by re-enacting scenes from the original (including the classic "D'you put the balls in?" exchange) almost word-for-word.
Aside from the differences in performance, what these moments of direct translation really highlight is the totally different feel that this Inbetweeners has compared to the original. When Joey Pollari claimed that the remake is "a completely different show", he wasn't kidding.
Whereas the cringe comedy of the UK series felt almost painfully real, this is a far more heightened experience. Can you really imagine an episode of the original series climaxing with an empowering slow-motion montage? And while the original series had cartoonish traits, most notably in the character of Will, moments in this US take - such as the new Will's lunchtime routine - are just plain silly.
But what of the claims made by the producers of this MTV series, that The Inbetweeners wouldn't be watered down for a US audience? Did they stay true to their word?
The answer is partly - we're treated to plenty of immature sex-talk, and lines like "I'd literally renob her so hard, my penis would be pushed back into my body" and "It is a little molestery" are genuinely funny.
But here bad language is a no-no - our heroes swear, sure, but curse words are bleeped out to avoid offending viewers of a delicate disposition. However you want to spin it, that seems like 'watering down' to us.
MTV's Inbetweeners has a rocky road ahead - it suffers from uneven performances, US censorship and, for UK viewers at least, an uneasy sense of déjà vu. But this first episode does contain some great moments ("It wasn't cheap... it had gold in it.") and the series trailer that followed also promises more laughs - a cheap gag it may be, but Jay accidentally propositioning children with his sexy sign made us giggle...
As it stands, this Inbetweeners is not a great show, but you can feel potential bubbling under. Anyone remember the poorly-received first season of the US Office? Only when that series threw off the shackles of its predecessor and became its own show did it flourish. Perhaps the same will prove true here.