Due to the requirement of actually having to do some work (rather than snort coke and drink whiskey straight from the bottle), our review of Party Animals has been rather delayed. But there’s been no shortage of commentary elsewhere. There’s a blow-by-blow account from Hamer Shawcross, Kerron thinks the main character is based on him (and I’d be tempted to agree), though Gweirdo is somewhat doubtful.
The views of non-bloggers (i.e. vaguely normal people) I’ve spoken to have been incredibly polarised - some think it was rather good, others that it was complete crap, and I think it depends largely on what you were hoping for.
If you wanted to see serious politics, policy arguments over lunch, drunken debates on football and pop culture in the bar, or anything resembling what really happens day to day in Parliament, you were disappointed. I have to confess that my average day involves slightly less sex, drugs and death than depicted in the show.
If you wanted a pacy drama in an interesting and unique setting and some fit people to ogle, you were quite happy. And after a hard day, who doesn’t want some mindless TV to watch?
Highlights - definitely the well constructed set (Portcullis House could not have been done better), the portrayl of the party whips, and the complete absence of the Lib Dems. Got the priorities right there.
Lowlights - while I could give you a list of minor discrepancies as long as your arm, notably Ministers speaking from the backbenches, the idea that researchers formulate Government policy is a complete nonsense. Though it will make us look more important than we are in the eyes of future employers, so not all bad there!
In summary it’s what you make of it, but I reckon most researchers will still be watching next week.
Edit: Thanks to 2Tall for pointing out that the Village Vermin site has been updated to link to us here.
redtamarin[at]gmail.com
Loading ...
I think it would be fair to say that Mr Clarke is a regular...
Blimey, one little link and you’re all over them like a rash.
Lobster Blogster said this on February 1st, 2007 at 11:49 pm
Don’t forget the amazingly cringeworthy idea that some lowly staffer is going to go to the Chief Whip’s office (which isn’t in PCH) and resign!
I know many staffers in Parliament who think they are important enough to have an audience with the Chief Whip, but in reality there are scores of fresh out of university New Labour lovies who are willing to work for pittance!
Eskimo Nell said this on February 2nd, 2007 at 10:33 am
“I have to confess that my average day involves slightly less sex”
Given the almost total absence of any sex in episode one, I can only offer you my deepest sympathies.
Juvenal said this on February 2nd, 2007 at 12:20 pm
I’ll have you know that Hilary Armstrong used to have a queue of researchers lined up outside her office each week after PMQs waiting to prostrate themselves at her feet NOT.
Recess Monkey said this on February 2nd, 2007 at 1:22 pm
has anyone else tried the log in page for that village vermin?
its more of a c*ck tease than half the cast of the show
ray said this on February 2nd, 2007 at 1:32 pm
Have you people not heard of dramatic licence? The writers should certainly have made the researchers more dull and literal-minded id they wanted it to be truly realistic. The set was Portcullis House, so everything has to happen there. And, guess what, most viewers will never notice the difference because most viewers don’t work there.
The reaction to Party Animals (essentially a piece of prime time light entertainment with a Westminster back drop) has been hilarious. One ex-researcher writing a piece for a broadsheet even called me (I’m the political consultant on the programme) to ask if it was going to send shockwaves through the civil service because there are no scenes in a Whitehall ministry. Er… no.
Martin Bright said this on February 6th, 2007 at 12:13 pm