I must start by saying I am a massive fan of the original series of Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister.I watched them when first transmitted and later bought the box sets and watch them at least once a year. The interesting thing about them is that, despite them being made many years ago, they haven't really aged. Admittedly the references to finances are out of date as far as amounts go etc, but the situations, to a great extent, still exist in politics today in a similar form. Also the original cast was practically flawless and gelled so well together you really believed in the characters, even the supporting cast was believable and strong.
So this 'reboot' had an extremely difficult job from the start and as I watched the first episode I kept hearing the dialogue in the voices of the original cast. something rather hard to shake off. There were some funny lines but all too often they were less effective than intended because of the totally different way the three main protagonists handled their characters.
In the closing credits it says 'based on the stage play' and, indeed the last 4 episodes are really one main continuing story line involving possible procurement of sexual favours for a foreign diplomat which, at times, almost descended into farce. The other big difference is that the series is set at the Prime Ministers country residence and not No 10, which I can understand as a stage play but feel it detracted from the series as a whole.
I mentioned the principle characters earlier, Jim Hacker was portrayed more as a gurning idiot than an idealist with an average intelligence, Sir Humphrey was too animated to do his character justice and also had an annoying laugh and Bernard Wooley looked more like a rugby player with weird hair than a sincere, eager to please civil servant.
Perhaps if I had never seen the original I could have been kinder, but I feel that trying to bring back a TV programme that was voted as 9th best British Sit Com ever was probably on a hiding to nothing from the start.
Worth a look if you have either never seen the original or can really watch this and forget your memories of the original. Sadly, for me, neither of these conditions applied.
So this 'reboot' had an extremely difficult job from the start and as I watched the first episode I kept hearing the dialogue in the voices of the original cast. something rather hard to shake off. There were some funny lines but all too often they were less effective than intended because of the totally different way the three main protagonists handled their characters.
In the closing credits it says 'based on the stage play' and, indeed the last 4 episodes are really one main continuing story line involving possible procurement of sexual favours for a foreign diplomat which, at times, almost descended into farce. The other big difference is that the series is set at the Prime Ministers country residence and not No 10, which I can understand as a stage play but feel it detracted from the series as a whole.
I mentioned the principle characters earlier, Jim Hacker was portrayed more as a gurning idiot than an idealist with an average intelligence, Sir Humphrey was too animated to do his character justice and also had an annoying laugh and Bernard Wooley looked more like a rugby player with weird hair than a sincere, eager to please civil servant.
Perhaps if I had never seen the original I could have been kinder, but I feel that trying to bring back a TV programme that was voted as 9th best British Sit Com ever was probably on a hiding to nothing from the start.
Worth a look if you have either never seen the original or can really watch this and forget your memories of the original. Sadly, for me, neither of these conditions applied.