I'd hoped this would be the bit where the petition arrives: Bernard: "Should I file it, Minister?" Hacker: "File it? Burn it! I never want to see it again" Bernard: "Then, Minister, I believe it's best that i file it" One of my personal favourite lines, but not often quoted.
@TomisHoare Just out of curiosity, what did you actually think would happen? That by pointing out that I'd got the quote a bit wrong that you'd expose me as a fraud, I'd tear of my mask and reveal that I hate Yes, Minister and was spreading slight misquotes as part of some villainous scheme? Or did you think you'd flag yourself as a 'superior' fan by pointing out it was wrong, but not bothering to provide the accurate quote? Either way, I said it was "One of my personal favourite lines" not my "favourite line" - petty and insignificant maybe, but you seem to care a great deal about accuracy in quotes.
Omg yeah I just realized the show never really do such a thing, so hacker must really have stumbled. And Humphrey asking what seem to have been genuine too haha but they continue on anyway 😂
LMAO...Sir Humphrey's penchant for mischievously utilizing incredibly florid vocabulary to momentarily confuse the PM was always the best part of the series!
I never read it as mischievous, since he also did it when reluctantly revealing that he had made a mistake. He is just a natural dissembler, prone to excessively but very specifically denoting the precise terms of the communicated information even if it is either repetitious or deleterious to comprehension.
If you unravel Humphrey's statements, they're actually very logical, precise, and relevant to the topic. He just finds it useful to confound his listeners with the rhetorical technique of using forty long words to say something that could be conveyed with ten short ones.
@@danieldickson8591 Yes, I never had any trouble following Humphrey's statements. Yes, he's sometimes verbose, but his thoughts always follow a clear line of reasoning. It's much harder to follow someone who speaks "plainly" but whose thoughts are all over the place.
Paul Eddington could convey so much without saying a word, just with his facial expressions. It got to the point where the script writers would include notes reading, "Paul can skip these lines if he'd rather use his face." 😏
[This situation was not without precedent. In April 1965 the Home Secretary told the House of Commons that ‘no useful purpose’ would be served by reopening the enquiry into the Timothy Evans case. This was despite a passionate appeal from a leading member of the Opposition front bench, Sir Frank Soskice, who said: ‘My appeal to the Home Secretary is most earnest. I believe that if ever there was a debt due to justice and to the reputation both of our own judicial system and to the public conscience . . . that debt is one the Home Secretary should now repay.’ Interestingly enough, a general election had occurred between the launching and the presenting of the petition. Consequently the Home Secretary who rejected Sir Frank Soskice’s impassioned appeal - and petition - for an enquiry was Sir Frank Soskice - Ed.] The Complete Yes Minister.
@@richardevans8474Oh, but modern western democracies are full of extraordinarily talented politicians. Only talent refers here to their marvellous ability to advance their own political and personnal interests at the expense of the interests of our nations.
Paul Eddington is an actor who could really use his face. It's just a bit odd every time I hear his name because in the film "In Harm's Way" (1965) Kirk Douglas played a character named "Paul Eddington." And Kirk Douglas could use his face, too.
Paul Eddington's face is so eloquent, the writers started putting notes in the script that Paul could discard certain lines and just use facial expressions if he wanted to.
I believe that a certain minster DID reject his own petition once. Probably during the Wilson government. Edit: It was Frank Soskice, the Home Secretary.
Yes, a lot of what happened in Yes Minister/Prime Minister was based on events that actually happened - the empty hospital and the 'emergency communications room' being two such examples.
oh no!! u didnt grammar properly on a youtube comment - better send in ur resignation now, else someone is bout to hav u fired frm ur post for incompetence! lmao
People want instant gratification nowadays. This 6 seconds pause too much to handle for this netflix era. But I believe you are right and I miss this kind of acting/facial expressions.
Available on DVD. Complete YM & YPM + "Party Games", the 1hr Christmas special when Jim Hacker becomes PM. Enjoy the wonderful wit and wisdom of British comedy/documentary at its best.
@@stephenphillip5656 yea but no one buys dvd's anymore..my mac doesn't even have a cd-rom..i've been struggling for the longest time to find it on streaming sites, it can't be found which sucks
@@lm_b5080 Buy DVDS and the ability to play them. Once purchased, forever owned. Streaming services control what and when you can view. Much content will disappear for political and financial reasons. Be your own censor.
I always think that these public figures that push for disbanding the Forces, if in the situation where their lives are threatened will scream for protection. But who will bw there after the Forces are gone?
IN MY COUNTRY they do it all the time, they propose something then the great bogeyman Sverigedemokraterna are supporting it so they vote against their own proposal.
I'd hoped this would be the bit where the petition arrives:
Bernard: "Should I file it, Minister?"
Hacker: "File it? Burn it! I never want to see it again"
Bernard: "Then, Minister, I believe it's best that i file it"
One of my personal favourite lines, but not often quoted.
Thank you for sharing! I wish I could find mine, the one where Humphrey says bureaucracy lives forever
TheRenaissanceman65 pls show me the link. I’ve been looking for it for ages.
TheRenaissanceman65 not really. But the vehemence was real
@TomisHoare I humbly apologise, may I be forever trapped in purgatory for being slightly wrong on the internet.
@TomisHoare Just out of curiosity, what did you actually think would happen? That by pointing out that I'd got the quote a bit wrong that you'd expose me as a fraud, I'd tear of my mask and reveal that I hate Yes, Minister and was spreading slight misquotes as part of some villainous scheme? Or did you think you'd flag yourself as a 'superior' fan by pointing out it was wrong, but not bothering to provide the accurate quote? Either way, I said it was "One of my personal favourite lines" not my "favourite line" - petty and insignificant maybe, but you seem to care a great deal about accuracy in quotes.
Reporter: Are u accepting or rejecting it?
Hacker: No!
That's a balanced answer, without over simplifying the case, one way or the other.😅
Sir Humprey would say in such casas, "Well that is not the question." He would then rephrase the question to a less awkward one and fire it back.
03:00 its a testament to the calibre of the cast that this fumbled line is handled so well that it can just be put into the final cut.
Until you pointed it out, I didn't even KNOW it was a flubbed line. I thought it was just a pause for audience laughter.
WELL DONE
Omg yeah I just realized the show never really do such a thing, so hacker must really have stumbled. And Humphrey asking what seem to have been genuine too haha but they continue on anyway 😂
LMAO...Sir Humphrey's penchant for mischievously utilizing incredibly florid vocabulary to momentarily confuse the PM was always the best part of the series!
I never read it as mischievous, since he also did it when reluctantly revealing that he had made a mistake. He is just a natural dissembler, prone to excessively but very specifically denoting the precise terms of the communicated information even if it is either repetitious or deleterious to comprehension.
This one was pretty straightforward to be fair.
Stop it.
If you unravel Humphrey's statements, they're actually very logical, precise, and relevant to the topic. He just finds it useful to confound his listeners with the rhetorical technique of using forty long words to say something that could be conveyed with ten short ones.
@@danieldickson8591 Yes, I never had any trouble following Humphrey's statements. Yes, he's sometimes verbose, but his thoughts always follow a clear line of reasoning.
It's much harder to follow someone who speaks "plainly" but whose thoughts are all over the place.
Love his long pause followed by that 'oh'. He's not sure whether to be thankful or insulted :P.
The answer is, of course, both.
Paul Eddington could convey so much without saying a word, just with his facial expressions. It got to the point where the script writers would include notes reading, "Paul can skip these lines if he'd rather use his face." 😏
2:50 the change in expressions is so deserving Paul Eddington !!
Comedy genius as he tries to work out how to react.
[This situation was not without precedent.
In April 1965 the Home Secretary told the House of Commons that ‘no useful purpose’ would be served by reopening the enquiry into the Timothy Evans case. This was despite a passionate appeal from a leading member of the Opposition front bench, Sir Frank Soskice, who said: ‘My appeal to the Home Secretary is most earnest. I believe that if ever there was a debt due to justice and to the reputation both of our own judicial system and to the public conscience . . . that debt is one the Home Secretary should now repay.’
Interestingly enough, a general election had occurred between the launching and the presenting of the petition. Consequently the Home Secretary who rejected Sir Frank Soskice’s impassioned appeal - and petition - for an enquiry was Sir Frank Soskice - Ed.]
The Complete Yes Minister.
My God, that’s brilliant.
@@englandcountryhuman8588 Life can weirder than fiction.
It is said that a mosquito can dodge falling rain. I am of the firm belief a good politician would give them a good run for their money :)
Problem wud be finding a "Good Politician"
@@richardevans8474 That is very optimistic thinking that that could even be done.
@@richardevans8474 equally problemlematic finding intelligent, informed voters!
A good run for their money? Bloodsucking, perhaps.
@@richardevans8474Oh, but modern western democracies are full of extraordinarily talented politicians. Only talent refers here to their marvellous ability to advance their own political and personnal interests at the expense of the interests of our nations.
The journey Jim takes us on starting at 2:50 is epic
At the end of this episode when Bernard rolls signatures and following dialogue(Antenna Bernard)is marvelous final accord to splendid episode.
Perfectly cast, wonderful scripting.
Paul Eddington is an actor who could really use his face. It's just a bit odd every time I hear his name because in the film "In Harm's Way" (1965) Kirk Douglas played a character named "Paul Eddington." And Kirk Douglas could use his face, too.
2:50 to 2:58
The Minister must be thinking "I don't know whether I should be relieved or insulted."
The minister's expression after he was told he is not worty enough to be asscinated , is better than 90 percent of whole career of Bollywood actors.
Paul Eddington's face is so eloquent, the writers started putting notes in the script that Paul could discard certain lines and just use facial expressions if he wanted to.
Oh yes and i remember the tim when our civil servants were this good now they are bunch if knitwitts
Ah He was a genius loved him RIP
Mosquito can dodge falling rain?! That's marvelous isn't it! 🕯
I believe that a certain minster DID reject his own petition once. Probably during the Wilson government.
Edit: It was Frank Soskice, the Home Secretary.
Any idea who?
@@fryliver4953 I just looked it up: it was Frank Soskice, Home Secretary in the first Wilson Ministry.
@@person-1184 Oh, interesting. What was the petition about? I can't find anything about it.
@@fryliver4953 it was about a posthumous pardon for Timothy Evans (executed for murder, later pardoned in 2003). I read it in the Yes Minister Book.
Yes, a lot of what happened in Yes Minister/Prime Minister was based on events that actually happened - the empty hospital and the 'emergency communications room' being two such examples.
This along with the rose water jar incident was the most obvious example of what politician are really into.
best government show i ever seen and I'm in government!
And yet you don't know to start sentences with a capital, that it's capital for 'I' and that it's 'I've ever seen' or 'I ever saw'. Moron.
Now I'm curious - what do you do, and in which government? :)
oh no!! u didnt grammar properly on a youtube comment - better send in ur resignation now, else someone is bout to hav u fired frm ur post for incompetence! lmao
The reporter was the human embodiment of the term "frump".
2:52 to 2:58 should be shown to all budding comedians... in fact to any actors.
People want instant gratification nowadays. This 6 seconds pause too much to handle for this netflix era. But I believe you are right and I miss this kind of acting/facial expressions.
man this show is funny. I usually watch dumb shit this is great.
That’s Ivor Roberts unless I’m mistaken
Johnson and his Brexit 😂😂😂😂😂
which season and episode is this?
And to think this "not important enough" Minister becomes Prime Minister shortly afterwards.
Where can I see the full episodes?
Available on DVD. Complete YM & YPM + "Party Games", the 1hr Christmas special when Jim Hacker becomes PM. Enjoy the wonderful wit and wisdom of British comedy/documentary at its best.
@@stephenphillip5656 yea but no one buys dvd's anymore..my mac doesn't even have a cd-rom..i've been struggling for the longest time to find it on streaming sites, it can't be found which sucks
Sabena Francis You could get the dvd.
@@lm_b5080 Buy DVDS and the ability to play them. Once purchased, forever owned. Streaming services control what and when you can view. Much content will disappear for political and financial reasons. Be your own censor.
Dailymotion
"...Arguably marginal and peripheral nature of your influence..."
I'm gonna use it next time i need to say "nobody listens to you" to someone face.
well theres no time like the present.
He never will be missed . . echoes of Gilbert & Sullivan
Classic satire on modern democracy
What does egregious mean?
Respectable.
@ a true fan of the show would have written "outstanding in one way or the other". 😜
@@57_a_sarthak22 Haha I suppose you're right. I wish I could buy this whole show, but it doesn't ship to my country.
@ where do you live? I live in India and it's on prime.
In this context, of superlative degree, with a negative connotation. So, outstanding (in a bad way).
I always think that these public figures that push for disbanding the Forces, if in the situation where their lives are threatened will scream for protection. But who will bw there after the Forces are gone?
Its simple, private army, in that case the power is even more concentrated.
🤦🏻♂️
@@fsdds1488 The road to anarchy.
@@colinp2238 That is not anarchy, just regional powers.
@@fsdds1488 Every journey starts with one step. Where does the control of "regional powers" start and where does it end?
IN MY COUNTRY they do it all the time, they propose something then the great bogeyman Sverigedemokraterna are supporting it so they vote against their own proposal.