Yes, Prime Minister (2013) Page 3

Quote: Aaron @ January 18 2013, 10:11 PM GMT

There is indeed relatively little risk in a new series of such a comedy; but there's even less once you've calculated to the nth degree with a pilot.

View original

So your argument is, what? That commissioning shows without a pilot would prove that the commissioning editors have bigger stones than those that demand a pilot? This is all a bit "inside the Beltway", isn't it? Apart from other commissioning editors at the commissioning editors club bar ("hey, Tarquin, I commissioned a series from my gap yah friends and didn't ask for a pilot. I'm RADICAL"), who cares?

Well, it would appear that someone who cares is incredibly thin-skinned writers. The makers of YPM were presumably told that if they made a pilot, they'd stand a good chance of being offered a slot on a mainstream BBC channel. They threw a tantrum, and are now on the Old People Stuck At Home Who Cares channel, being watched by effectively no-one, with adverts to enhance their artistic vision. Well done to them. Big round of applause. They're sticking it to the man, indeed.

YPM is a hideously dated programme which, when viewed from today, smells of formaldehyde (to mix a metaphor). Most of the original cast are dead or retired, and thanks to televised select committees grilling perm secs we also know much more about the mise en scene. Today, it makes The Men From The Ministry look like The Thick Of It. Asking for a pilot was entirely reasonable, as outside people nostalgic for the 1980s, the programme has little resonance today. And now it's ended up on a channel with all the other re-runs. The right outcome, by the wrong route. Perhaps a decent pilot would have given an opportunity to write something with an appeal outside the past.

Well, I liked it. It felt like the old Yes, Prime Minister exactly, in terms of script and was very enjoyable for it.

The only notable difference I felt was that David Haig's Hacker is very different from Paul Eddington. But that's a good thing as it made it distinct from the original (a re-imagining, if you will), set in a different universe.

I laughed a lot, so keep it up.

Dan

It worked, just about, on stage. The problem with redoing this type of sitcom is the impossibility of living up to the weight of memories of the original. David Haig was good, but he is a very different actor to Paul Eddington and can never BE Paul Eddington. That doesn't make him better or worse, it means when you watch Yes Minister you expect to see Paul Eddington and Nigel Hawthorne and anyone else will be a disappointment.

Can anyone imagine redoing Fawlty without John Cleese? Or Black Adder wothout Rowan Atkinson? I find that (ok it's not a sitcom) Sherlock works only because it is so different to all previous Sherlock Holmes stuff. If they'd tried to match or better Jeremy Brett they wouldn't have.

Quote: Tokyo Nambu @ January 19 2013, 11:15 AM GMT

So your argument is, what? That commissioning shows without a pilot would prove that the commissioning editors have bigger stones than those that demand a pilot? This is all a bit "inside the Beltway", isn't it? Apart from other commissioning editors at the commissioning editors club bar ("hey, Tarquin, I commissioned a series from my gap yah friends and didn't ask for a pilot. I'm RADICAL"), who cares?

Well, it would appear that someone who cares is incredibly thin-skinned writers. The makers of YPM were presumably told that if they made a pilot, they'd stand a good chance of being offered a slot on a mainstream BBC channel. They threw a tantrum, and are now on the Old People Stuck At Home Who Cares channel, being watched by effectively no-one, with adverts to enhance their artistic vision. Well done to them. Big round of applause. They're sticking it to the man, indeed.

YPM is a hideously dated programme which, when viewed from today, smells of formaldehyde (to mix a metaphor). Most of the original cast are dead or retired, and thanks to televised select committees grilling perm secs we also know much more about the mise en scene. Today, it makes The Men From The Ministry look like The Thick Of It. Asking for a pilot was entirely reasonable, as outside people nostalgic for the 1980s, the programme has little resonance today. And now it's ended up on a channel with all the other re-runs. The right outcome, by the wrong route. Perhaps a decent pilot would have given an opportunity to write something with an appeal outside the past.

View original

You spent all that time writing that and still came up short. If you don't get the YPM is topical hence why even when you watch old version you get it, as that's how some of the things we know as status quo came to be. The appeal is today and you clearly have never had a reputation to guard when you reach a certain level being questioned is an outrage in the civilised world. But doubt you'd get it perhaps a read of the 48 laws may clue you in.

How was the second episode compared to the first? Not many posts on this show so far so the reception seems to be lukewarm at best.

David Haig has been used in comedy shows and films for years, and everyone always says how great he is. I don't get it. He is so over the top, to the point of being embarrassing to watch. Just watch him in The Thick Of It. He almost comes across like someting from the silent movie days. He is so out of sink with the others on the show.

Quote: Badhead @ January 25 2013, 4:55 PM GMT

David Haig has been used in comedy shows and films for years, and everyone always says how great he is. I don't get it. He is so over the top, to the point of being embarrassing to watch. Just watch him in The Thick Of It. He almost comes across like someting from the silent movie days. He is so out of sink with the others on the show.

View original

No love for Haig in The Thin Blue Line? I thought he was good there.

Second episode was a tad better than the first, but pretty similar, so if you didn't like the first one, you won't like the second one, so don't even bother with it.

Had a look at this Tuesday night, not really for my taste but seemed funny if you like that sort of thing.

Quote: Edwin @ January 26 2013, 4:43 AM GMT

No love for Haig in The Thin Blue Line? I thought he was good there.

View original

You're not wrong there. That's why I'm interested in this new version of YPM...and because I liked the original.

Absolutely marvellous. Such a pity so few people are seeing it, tucked away on Gold.

"Prime Ministers have a special talent for missing the obvious. And this one is exceptionally gifted in that regard. His capacity for self-deception borders on genius."

Jay and Lynn still wonderfully incisive.

Is Aaron the only one on this site watching it? So few posts on this show. I can't see it because obviously I don't have GOLD.

I'm watching it and enjoying it but I am rather disappointed that, so far, it is the stage show script with a moderate amount of padding. Jonathan Lynn should have just handed the BBC commissioning editors a few tickets to see the show?

The one thing that's slightly grating about this series are Sir Humphrey's lengthy, flowery, intricate speeches. There's just something about them here that feels a bit like they're ticking boxes of things to include in each episode; less natural. I don't know if that's in the delivery or what, but it is standing out to me.

Everything else I'm loving. Great stuff.

I've been watching this, as a devoted fan of the original shows, radio versions, books, etc etc. For me, there are two main problems, and a few minor ones. The first has already been mentioned:

Quote: Aaron @ January 17 2013, 4:56 PM GMT

I still think it's a massive mistake of them to produce a series-long narrative arc rather than stand-alone episodes, however.

View original

Each episode has had a strong central theme: Gas pipelines, Eastern oil Money, The Euro, BBC funding, Bunga Bunga parties, Scottish independence, etc. It would have taken a tiny amount of tweaking, and a few minutes additional material, to extract these narratives from the stage-play arc and produce them as standalone episodes. And the show would have benefited.

Secondly, it was a mistake to keep the Jim Hacker identity. Paul Eddington's Hacker was bumbling, not particularly self-aware, but essentially moral. Haig's Hacker is a direct satire of Cameron in "Flashman mode", and is largely dislikeable for it. He should have been a wholly new Prime Minister.

I don't know if it was a particularly wise decision to include bad language in the dialogue, and to have focused on sex workers for two whole episodes. I think they will lose viewers of a certain generation for that (my grandparents are avid fans, but I know they would find it uncomfortable viewing). The great thing about Yes PM being that it was a teatime antidote to The Thick Of It.

Despite that, I think some of the topics satirised are more daring than Iannucci ever attempted. TTOI would not touch the licence fee or establishment sex trafficking, for example.

I think the writers/producers would have been better served by taking a Drop the Dead Donkey style approach to this series. The business of government interspersed with breaking stories (eg. horse meat scandal, more banking corruption, etc) - or, even better, bring back Drop the Dead Donkey with a mix of new and old cast members!?