Veep: B/ill
June 2, 2015 3:57 PM - Season 4, Episode 8 - Subscribe
There is a (Families First) bill. The President is ill.
Meyer's advisors fall all over one another trying to sink the former--while working around the latter--culminating in a face-off between two teams (Amy&Dan and Jonah&Richard) deployed in opposite ways to the same end. Confusing? Perhaps, but not all the Congresscritters are fooled.
The result? Everyone's in the thick of it.
Meyer's advisors fall all over one another trying to sink the former--while working around the latter--culminating in a face-off between two teams (Amy&Dan and Jonah&Richard) deployed in opposite ways to the same end. Confusing? Perhaps, but not all the Congresscritters are fooled.
The result? Everyone's in the thick of it.
As if every episode of Veep doesn't remind us of the glorious days of The Thick of It. Britain is so sure of its class structure and governmental paralysis that you can do truly biting satire, get away with it, and yet have pretty much nothing change. In America, all we get are watered down incompetents running around like chickens with their heads cut off.
In The Thick of It, and especially in the larger tradition of British political TV satire like Yes (Prime) Minister, the majority of characters aren't buffoons. Malcolm Tucker, his downfall excepted, was frighteningly competent at achieving whatever he wanted. Sir Humphrey Appleby was a mastermind at manipulation. And what change did these characters want? Nothing. The present political system suited them wonderfully, and so they largely existed to preserve the status quo at all costs. This inactivity is not due to a failure to execute, but is rather the entire conceit of the shows. Powerful government ministers are seen to be utterly powerless, not due to their own failures, but because the system is designed to keep them that way. That cynicism is where the social commentary in these shows comes from.
In Veep, nobody achieves anything either, but the systemic causes are never explored. Situations are setup merely for comedy as an incompetent staff fail to support an incompetent leader. While that's a fine comic setup (it worked for The Office after all), there's no broader point to it, and that's what saddens me about Veep.
posted by zachlipton at 10:37 PM on June 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
In The Thick of It, and especially in the larger tradition of British political TV satire like Yes (Prime) Minister, the majority of characters aren't buffoons. Malcolm Tucker, his downfall excepted, was frighteningly competent at achieving whatever he wanted. Sir Humphrey Appleby was a mastermind at manipulation. And what change did these characters want? Nothing. The present political system suited them wonderfully, and so they largely existed to preserve the status quo at all costs. This inactivity is not due to a failure to execute, but is rather the entire conceit of the shows. Powerful government ministers are seen to be utterly powerless, not due to their own failures, but because the system is designed to keep them that way. That cynicism is where the social commentary in these shows comes from.
In Veep, nobody achieves anything either, but the systemic causes are never explored. Situations are setup merely for comedy as an incompetent staff fail to support an incompetent leader. While that's a fine comic setup (it worked for The Office after all), there's no broader point to it, and that's what saddens me about Veep.
posted by zachlipton at 10:37 PM on June 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
In Veep, nobody achieves anything either, but the systemic causes are never explored.
You don't think so? There was a whole episode just this season about how the military was all too happy to cut an expensive boondoggle of a program, but Congress forced the Administration to retain it because it provided jobs in a bunch of districts. That kind of horse-trading short-sighted inertia is pretty much endemic to Washington's ills.
posted by psoas at 9:19 AM on June 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
You don't think so? There was a whole episode just this season about how the military was all too happy to cut an expensive boondoggle of a program, but Congress forced the Administration to retain it because it provided jobs in a bunch of districts. That kind of horse-trading short-sighted inertia is pretty much endemic to Washington's ills.
posted by psoas at 9:19 AM on June 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
Joseph, you have incredibly depressed me. I wish I had faith that veep was going to stay good without Iannucci, but I really don't.
I hadn't viewed this as a series finale, but with the closing credits of everyone testifying before congress it really works well as one.
posted by bswinburn at 6:37 PM on June 3, 2015
I hadn't viewed this as a series finale, but with the closing credits of everyone testifying before congress it really works well as one.
posted by bswinburn at 6:37 PM on June 3, 2015
There are two more episodes this season.
posted by psoas at 9:50 AM on June 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by psoas at 9:50 AM on June 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
So glad to see Hugh Laurie join the cast - he's fitting in really well and believable in his role as popular politician.
They seem to be writing more for Tony Hale ('Gary') which is great, and a bit more for the stoic Sue (played by Sufe Bradshaw).
"New rule in the Cube!"
I just read this on Wikipedia: Oh shit.
posted by joseph conrad is fully awesome at 9:53 PM on June 2, 2015