TV Home Forum

Yes, Prime Minister return

Discussion about the return of a classic! (August 2012)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
SP
Steve in Pudsey
I think they'd have done better bringing Derek Fowlds back (assuming he was up for it) as Sir Bernard, having been promoted (and knighted) on Sir Humphrey's retirement.
WO
Worzel
I think they'd have done better bringing Derek Fowlds back (assuming he was up for it) as Sir Bernard, having been promoted (and knighted) on Sir Humphrey's retirement.


He did appear in the documentary, shown after the first episode in the new series - where he met a 'real life Bernard'. Maybe he's now fully retired after Heartbeat stopped and didn't want to do it?
NE
Neil__
I've just watched the first one.

Oh dear.

A *lot* of recycled jokes from the classic series, poorly-cast characters (particularly Hacker and Sir Humphrey), intrusive laughter and even a poor set.

To my mind, it sullies the memory of the original and I won't be watching any more.
BA
bilky asko
Having watched a couple of the originals for the first time recently, and this remake, I have to say this remake is cack, for all the reasons Neil DG outlines. I didn't watch the whole thing it was that bad.
WH
Whataday Founding member
I think the casting is the problem. The acting is just not convincing and the characters come across as smug and unlikable.

Have been watching Drop The Dead Donkey recently and I think Jeff Rawle who played George Dent wouldve made a great Jim Hacker.
NE
Neil__
I think the casting is the problem. The acting is just not convincing and the characters come across as smug and unlikable.


The person they've got to play Sir Humphrey doesn't even seem to be taking it seriously. Nigel Hawthorne was always utterly believable in the role.
GS
Gavin Scott Founding member
I think the casting is the problem. The acting is just not convincing and the characters come across as smug and unlikable.


The person they've got to play Sir Humphrey doesn't even seem to be taking it seriously.


I think that's overstating it, but I can't deny that neither lead bear up to the comparison well. My hope is that there will be more nuance from Humphrey once the actor is more used to television acting. He's more of a theatre actor, isn't he?

There's still five episodes to be seen.
:-(
A former member
Has no one else notice from that Doc last week, Both the original Writers are over seeing this new version? including one being the Director. it seems some of the episodes are built over 2 instead of being singly
WH
Whataday Founding member
I think the casting is the problem. The acting is just not convincing and the characters come across as smug and unlikable.


The person they've got to play Sir Humphrey doesn't even seem to be taking it seriously.


I think that's overstating it, but I can't deny that neither lead bear up to the comparison well. My hope is that there will be more nuance from Humphrey once the actor is more used to television acting. He's more of a theatre actor, isn't he?

There's still five episodes to be seen.


I admire your hopes that this will be given a chance to grow, but highly unlikely.
GS
Gavin Scott Founding member
I think the casting is the problem. The acting is just not convincing and the characters come across as smug and unlikable.


The person they've got to play Sir Humphrey doesn't even seem to be taking it seriously.


I think that's overstating it, but I can't deny that neither lead bear up to the comparison well. My hope is that there will be more nuance from Humphrey once the actor is more used to television acting. He's more of a theatre actor, isn't he?

There's still five episodes to be seen.


I admire your hopes that this will be given a chance to grow, but highly unlikely.


Episode two did not support my hope.
GS
Gavin Scott Founding member
Jesus. It actually getting worse. Why do the leads play EVERY line with a grin?
:-(
A former member
So is there any point catching up on Ep2 and Ep3?

Newer posts