The unstated assumption doing the work here is that constraint generates creativity.
Make something in a different language, drop it in an unfamiliar cultural container, and audiences read freshness into the unfamiliarity. But Merton's self-fulfilling prophecy works in reverse too: if critics and viewers agree to call something 'charmingly offbeat' before interrogating what that charm actually is, the concept itself becomes the permission structure.
The film doesn't have to earn its novelty. It just has to exist.
The test case wasn't whether a different cultural interpretation deepens the material. The test case was whether people would show up for the concept alone, and they did. That's the data point everyone's dancing around.
The charm here might be entirely real, the production values excellent, the performances strong. But the coverage and the audience appetite behind it suggest none of that's actually the draw. If this exact same show aired without the French-language angle, with an American cast, in English, would anyone care. Does the honesty of that answer determine whether we're experiencing a genuine formal innovation or just watching the entertainment industry compress another idea into a concept and move on?