Fans of the British version of The Office have longed for Ricky Gervais' David Brent to stop by NBC's American remake for years, making it an official spin-off instead of just a remake. The news came that it was finally happening in this week's episode, and I got very excited. Looking back, it was said that Gervais would appear only in the opening, but the result was still a wasted opportunity! The show could easily have built an episode around him, not to mention an entire multi-episode arc, if they wanted to. Instead, we 
just got David and Michael (Steve Carell) talking weirdly to each other for a few seconds.
I try not to look a gift horse in the mouth, and I am still thrilled that Gervais appeared at all. I'm sure the fact that it was a small part was of his choosing. However, there was no explanation for how or why David was where he was; really, no story at all. As one of the most unique TV characters of all time (before he was imitated repeatedly by others), David Brent is a very entertaining creation that deserves more. Not only that, but I was still trying to decide if Gervais was really bringing the Brent I know and love alive when his short scene ended. I'm not convinced he really acted the character, at least not as well as he used to. I can't help but feel it was too quickly done and that a longer part would have captured Brent better.
Other than the opening, though, it was another excellent episode in this strong season of The Office. With Carell's episode count dwindling (he will be leaving the series for good four episodes before the season finale), Michael Scott has gotten more focus that ever. The arc most people want to see tied up is Michael's love for Holly Flax (Amy Ryan). Michael's other ex-girlfriends were all brought back earlier in the season and sent off one last time, but Holly is more than that. Holly is his soul mate,
and the last few episodes have only confirmed that point. She actually gets Michael, and enjoys his zany antics. What more can you ask for in a partner?
.jpg?t=20130517094513)
Article comments
1 - El Bicho
David Brent's appearance doesn't make the US Office a spin-off. Plus, it was an Easter egg for fans. Complaining about what it wasn't misses the point entirely
2 - Jerome Wetzel
In your opinion. I respectfully disagree on both counts.
3 - Michael J
By no practical definition does Gervais's cameo make The Office a spin-off. Spin-Off's focus on an existing character, location, or time periods of the original show. The Office is a reboot that cameo'd a character from the original show.
On another note, every scene with Gabe is absolutely awful and he pull the show down. They need to write him out quickly. He has no purpose and feels forced.
4 - Jerome Wetzel
It is a spin-off because using the David Brent character positively confirms that both shows take place in the same universe. It was not spun off as the beginning as most shows are, but it is a spin-off nevertheless.
And I like Gabe!
5 - kmd
I disagree.I,too wish David Brent had been on longer but we knew that wasn't gonna happen.For the minute or two he was on,very funny,especially the "that's what she said" line.Michael Scott teared up then he hugged Brent like a lost soul mate.Plus the question "any jobs opening up?',"No nothing right now",kind of a wink,wink.Cheers.
6 - Michael J
Just having David Brent appear in an episode doesn't make it a spin-off even if both shows DO take place in the same universe. There are endless examples of another tv show character having cameo appearances in completely different tv show. Doesn't make one a spin-off of the other.
Back to Gabe, his only apparent purpose is to act as a speed bump for Andy and Erin. He is essentially a forced version Roy, but more annoying and has a Creed-like job position.
7 - Jerome Wetzel
To use a well known example of spin-off, look at the Star Trek universe. Star Trek: Voyager did not contain any major characters in major parts from other Star Trek shows at the onset, but it was still considered a spin-off. Doing some research, it appears there is no set definition for what makes a spin-off, so it will come down to our personal opinions. Because of the crossover character, the related (same) title, and the same universe definition, I choose to believe it is one. I think we will just have to agree to disagree.
As to Gabe, there are some important distinctions between him and Roy. The biggest is that Gabe is a main character, contracted to continue appearing on the show. Roy was not, merely a recurring guest star. I think Gabe will have story after he and Erin end. He was there because Kathy Bates couldn't be every week, and he's their connection to the company owners.
8 - Costello
Never heard of a spin off used the way you are trying to. Having the same name obviously means it's a remake like the movies.
Plus, Voyager is a different than the Office. It's the further adventures of ships and members of Starfleet and the show is made by the same company. you can disagree but you're wrong.
9 - Jerome Wetzel
In your opinion. Which was my point.
10 - El Bicho
Just did a google search and after a few pages can't find anyone else who calls The Office a spin-off. You can't make up your own definition and then tell everyone else they have a different opinion. That's not the way it works.
I agree with Costello that the Voyager/Office comparison doesn't fit.
11 - Jerome Wetzel
El Bicho - I did plenty of google searches on spin-offs before defending my comment. There is no standard, accepted definition. I came across quite a few different ones. I didn't make a definition up. I'd appreciate if you'd stop accusing me of things you can't back up, or writing comments that are just plain rude.
12 - Costello
My son has a friend who works at Paramount. Had him inquire and Bobby says you are wrong about this being spinoff. It's a remake