too much farce, lost its realism
yes, (prime)minister was known for being, although comedic, relatively realistic. people in power were certain there were government insiders leaking anecdotes and details, because real events were appearing on the show. thats what made it simply brilliant; it was observational, it was charming, it was funny, it was almost voyeuristic as to how backroom deals are made, but it wasnt over the top to the point that you would think this could not ever happen. it was subtle, intelligent writing. it was almost scary how on the button some of the observations were, as has been said by real civil servants/politicians etc. david cameron wrote an essay once that yes minister was totally unrealisitic, since being in office, he has actually said it was more accurate than he feared.
so why did they give up on that? why take something thats funny because of how probable the events are, and dress them up in a clown suit?
the first episode of this new series had over the top, exagerated hammy acting, no realism, and became farcical in places, like the oil pipeline thats about 20 times too long so that it snakes back and forth, dipping a toe in every country in europe to give everyone a cut of the profit like mobsters dividing up a racket. the original series made jokes about the sort of absurdities that really had or really could have happened, through honest error, incompetance, or simply as a result of a burdensome bureaucracy. if it ever went out of the realms of the plausible, it only edged covertly over that line, the writers themselves have said the things people most often believed were too far, were usually things theyd been told had really, or nearly had, actually happened and thats why they felt ok with pushing the suspension of disbelief. this new show stomps around on the border of the plausible from start to finish. what on earth happened. and what was the ott canned sounding studio laughter, it popped up at the slightest, mildest, weakest shadow of a joke like something amazing was going on.
the characters have also been changed dramatically, jim hacker has gone from a well meaning, amiable, but somewhat self serving politician to a much more exagerated caricature of headline chasing and mean spiritedness. bernard has gone from the soft edged, carefully unoffensive but intelligent middle man who walks a middleground between the 2 other characters, knowing when to tread carefully, to a daffy, lispy baffoon who seems more a pastiche of alan b'stards favourite whipping boy. the original bernard may not always see the inside of humphreys scheming and need a few things made clearer, but this new bernard seems more a man child that, if he couldnt parrot latin phrases, would seem like an overgrown work experience kid who got lost. and humphrey, hes gone from snobby but charming and willing to do business with the devil himself if it benefitted the country or his personal friends, to more an old fashioned cold war relic afraid of the russians and obviously slimey and crawly. he has also gone from defending the power of the civil service at any cost, to determined to castrate british authority and hand it all to the eu. why would he be trying to push for the euro unless he has some personal motive, its too out of character.
ok if you want to shake up characters, if the overall result was good it can be forgiven, but they seem to want to do something drastically different with the show, where they are actually being hindered by the baggage of having to keep shadows of the old character traits, or at least pay them lip service. cut the cord or keep the spirit the same, dont try to put a foot each side of the fence at once or youl get yourself caught somewhere unpleasent.
there was also rather lazy references to old jokes, the sudden, oh yes bury it in the boxes, he never gets far, and the reference to the old swansea vehichle licensing centre, werent so much subtle homages to the old show when those jokes were first made, more *elbow to the ribs* eh, eh, ya remember that, eh, like what them other blokes said before, eh, eh. kumran, the country where they hid alcohol in the embassy, is now kumranistan, eh, eh, eh, remember, remember back when this was a good show? eh, eh? the references just felt crowbarred in.
the writing has just faceplanted since the original, maybe the writers shouldnt have just agreed to writing it because they were asked for 2 years by gold and the number of the cheque reached enough zeros, rather, they should have waited until they actually had some organic ideas theyd like to play with. they dont still have current contacts feeding them the inside scoop and they dont have their finger on the pulse anymore than the average person who flicks through the tabloids now and then, and it shows. where there were intelligent jokes, the result of lengthy research, there are now runs of buzzwords of political issues the average punter will have heard mentioned on newsnight once. such a shame.