ThiefHott Too much of everything

Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

grantss Following on from Yes Minister, Jim Hacker is now Prime Minister and Sir Humphrey Appleby is Cabinet Secretary. Bernard is also along for the ride, as Hacker's personal secretary. As in their previous roles, their jobs often devolve into a battle of agendas, ideals, wills and wits between Hacker and Sir Humphrey.Very similar formula to Yes Minister - the political ideals and poll-focus of the Prime Minister versus the practicality and preference to maintain the status quo of the civil service, with quite of few of Sir Humphrey's personal agendas thrown in for good measure. The main difference from Yes Minister is that everything is now at a higher level, and includes international diplomacy, defense projects and spending, education, local government - broader, national issues.Therein lies the problem with Yes, Prime Minister. Because of Yes Minister's lower level, its plots, issues and solutions were much more plausible. So plausible the series should be used in teaching Political Studies. Yes, Prime Minister, by comparison, feels contrived, and downright silly, at times.Fortunately this is a comedy, not a drama, so plausibility isn't a top concern. Still, it helps.When it comes to the humour, while still quite funny, this series seems less original than its predecessor, and happy to retread old jokes and use formulaic gags. Worst of all, Bernard, who was the face of innocence and the straight man to the machinations of Hacker and Sir Humphrey in Yes Minister, has been reduced to making lame puns and other one-liners. The writing is just not as tight or finely-crafted as in Yes Minister.This all said, it does make some great points about government and always does so in a very humorous fashion. Some issues raised are well ahead of their time and the laughs come thick and fast.Not as great as Yes Minister but still very good.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU The three excellent actors, Paul Eddington, Nigel Hawthorne and Derek Fowlds, in those two long running (several if not many years) mini series, are absolutely flabbergasting.The subject is simple. Jim Hacker, a Member of Parliament, becomes minister and later he will become prime minister. Banal. But what is less banal is the encounter of this newly appointment minister and later prime minister with the permanent secretary of his ministry first, Sir Humphrey, and cabinet secretary later when Jim Hacker moves to 10 Downing Street.Sir Humphrey, a knighted civil servant, is the most beautiful exemplar of the civil service functionaries: red tape, corporatism, elitism, systematic maneuvers and manipulations of ministers, prime ministers and other political officials to make them do what they, the civil servants, want them, the ministers and prime ministers, to do on any subject.And the subjects evoked in these numerous episodes of this political saga are quite evocative of corruption and aristocratism if not feudalism, and at the same time marvelously funny. It is true Bernard, the private secretary of Jim Hacker, a civil servant too but with a corrosive sense of black humor, is always there for a side remark that is superbly funny, like when the French President is trying to smuggle a dog into Great Britain in his diplomatic luggage, suitcase, briefcase or whatever. And Bernard to suggest a "doggy bag".At the same time this wit, this humor, this brilliant never ending linguistic, situational and existential irony, sarcasm or fun deals with fundamental problems.First of all the dictatorship of the civil service. The top civil servants are paid more than the ministers and prime ministers they serve and as such, as much as out of a feudal tradition, they are knighted and pretend to really manage the country in any way possible. This red tape defending privileges and rejecting the people into some kind of distant mist is a real problem in any democracy where politicians change but civil servants do not.Then education, real estate speculation, military expenditures and waste, foreign shady business if not plain behind the scene affairs, terrorism, the health service, the press and its passive or active manipulation or being manipulated in all directions possible, the blackmail of the ministers by the civil service or of the civil servants by the ministers, religion, universities, culture and so many other real concrete problems turned into a farce by the civil service and turned into a grotesque episode of political bravery by the politicians.This political satire and these caustic misrepresenting burlesque parodies of real life are a masterpiece in the field and is duly signed BBC. That kind of burlesque is no longer possible anywhere in the world with that finesse, that bright expertise and it is able to shame any other attempt from anywhere in the world because it is absolutely flippant and foolish but on subjects that are hefty and heavy and the moral of the story is not just fun but it is also ethics, ethical behavior and how it is possible to mend that frozen system into some thawing action.There is one limit and apparently only one: the queen and the crown and the royal family, royalty (but of course not royalties) and the monarchy are not supposed even to be evoked in any funny way. The rare mentions of the crown are always to remind us this crown is the standard by which ethics should be measured, the model for all politicians, the norm of all action.Of course the Queen is in no way present, even as a picture in these episodes, and her only appearances is a few times as a stamp on a letter, and no close-up view of it, of course not.Enjoy that marvelous buffoonery that is as light as air and as deep as the sea.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

Ben Grimm In my years as a student of political science at the university of Leiden, one of the professors used to rave about these series whenever the subject of British politics was on the agenda. And even though that professor wasn't the most humorous of chaps, his quotes and tales from the series always guaranteed a good laugh. I recently got hold of the entire series, and even though I do view them with a somewhat scholarly mind (old habits, and such), laughing out loud is my usual response. So cleverly written, such an exquisite cast of characters, such a mild way of portraying profound cynicism ("A cynic is what an idealist calls a realist", dixit Sir Humphrey Appleby).I will probably still look at it in ten, twenty, thirty years time (if I live to see the day) ... knowing that there will always be a Sir Humphrey Appleby, a Bernard Woolley and a Right Honorable James Hacker around somewhere preventing the series from becoming outdated.I don't know if that's something to look forward to, but if it guarantees the same laughs, I'm all for it!

naxash Jim Hacker is England's Prime Minister. He does have some good ideas, but Sir Humphrey -- played by Nigel Hawthorne -- always makes sure that none of Jim's ideas are realized. Jim Hacker is a Tory, alright, but he is in fact more of a liberal man -- that keeps Sir Humphrey busy, who would do anything to keep the UK from adopting progressive politics. Of course, Jim himself does have some serious flaws himself, not so much on the political, but rather on the personal side -- this makes Sir Humphrey's "job" a lot easier.Nigel Hawthorne spreads the same kind of Tory charm that he does in _Her Majesty Mrs Brown_, where he interprets D'Israeli. _Yes PM_ is for those who like a bit of politics and LOTS of humour: the eternal fight between progress (Jim, his wife, Dorothy) and reaction (Sir Humphrey and Bernard, Hacker's secretary, who's always driving the others mad with his speeches on Latin and Greek grammar...)