MovieChat Forums > Yes Minister (1980) Discussion > Brilliant but Tiring Series

Brilliant but Tiring Series


If you actually follow the arguments between the minister and the Asst Secretary, it is brilliant writing on how government, absurd as it sounds, actually does work (both in Great Britain and a great deal of it could be applied to American politics). The tiring bit is that you do have follow the flow of the arguments to get the reward of the punchlines (which are worth the effort but can be a while in coming).

I am baffled at how the writers of this series were actually able to pin down the machinations of politics found here. Once it is explained, through the series of encounters between the Minister and the Asst Secretary, you say to yourself, of course, that IS the way it works, but how the writers were able to follow all the threads to their conclusions to understand the workings (in order to be able to write the comedy skits that demonstrate the workings) is what I call a brilliant piece of deduction work.

The sad part is that even though this series tells you how politics works (both in England and America), 96% of the voting population could not be bothered and will continue to vote (if they vote at all) based on the lies they like from their party and against the lies they don't like told by the opposition. If they don't base their vote on that, then it might be that they like one guy's hair style or another candidate's folksy manner of speaking (which has nothing to do with content or ability to solve national problems).

I think that anybody considering a career in politics should study both this and Yes, Prime Minister. A college course with this show as its basis could easily entice students to use their brains instead of their emotions when looking at elected officials.

reply

I think the reason you need to really follow the arguments is that the comedy is not of the slapstick type. It does not arise out of a pie in the face or a funny collision. It is borne out of the situation and misery of the characters involved (mostly Hacker). This is mostly true of British comedy in that it is very wordy.


Apart from Yes Minister and Yes Prime minister, a college course can also include The Thick of It. A very funny show in its own right, it can be thought of as a Yes Minister set in contemporary times where everyone involved is busy trying cover up minister's incompetency or keeping the media hawks at bay or putting a positive spin on the minister's blunders/policies.


--
uh, what do I know ?!?

reply

[deleted]

You are correct about the need to closely follow the dialog to get the punch lines.

I have known people who like to knit/crochet/glimpse through catalogs, etc. while watching TV shows. Some shows, they can get every punchline or joke. Yes Minister and its sequel are two examples where they learn early that they need to fully focus or the show's humor will be lost on them.

As an American, there are some references the characters make that escape me, but I have watched enough British shows to know about most of the things they refer to. Other things, like "rates" can be figured out from the context.

Personally, I almost never let other things distract me while watching TV. I try to focus on any show so I won't miss interesting or funny lines. If it isn't good enough to hold my attention, I will switch it off or leave the room (if others are watching).

reply

According to the trivia, the writers had political insiders as advisors, and much of the show was based on real situations. Apparently some situations were never used because while they really happened, they simply seemed too unbelievable or contrived for a TV show.

reply

If you think people have the power because they can vote, or that voting does ANYTHING positive for the people, you haven't been watching this show properly at all - or the very least, the learning opportunities which this tele-visual feast has humbly presented upon aforementioned poster, have, alas, been disregarded completely for the shame of said individual.

reply