In the Loop

Reviews

• 

  Peter McGinn

  Dec 5, 2021

  6
  E his political satire is bursting with energy and, at times, with crackling dialogue. Hunger for power, incompetence, lack of respect for others, and betrayal are on full display. The movie had no problem keeping my interest, though it did lose my respect at times. The characters came across to me as fairly two-dimensional cardboard cutouts, and I was a little surprised to find they were exc=aptly the same way at the end. Maybe character growth is not needed in comedy, but a little more depth would have been great. I thought Gandolfini, Gina McKey and Mimi Kennedy came the closest to making their candidates real, but ultimately the script let them down. The Malcolm character was there at every turn to shout them down. The constant use of curse words reveals a lack of imagination, a lazy writer’s way of trying to titillate the audience. But when you hear the f-bomb every fifteen seconds, it loses all its shock value and exposes that lazy writing. So while the movie never lost me, it never really captured me either. I was just along for the ride.Read more

  E his political satire is bursting with energy and, at times, with crackling dialogue. Hunger for power, incompetence, lack of respect for others, and betrayal are on full display. The movie had no problem keeping my interest, though it did lose my respect at times. The characters came across to me as fairly two-dimensional cardboard cutouts, and I was a little surprised to find they were exc=aptly the same way at the end. Maybe character growth is not needed in comedy, but a little more depth would have been great. I thought Gandolfini, Gina McKey and Mimi Kennedy came the closest to making their candidates real, but ultimately the script let them down. The Malcolm character was there at every turn to shout them down. The constant use of curse words reveals a lack of imagination, a lazy writer’s way of trying to titillate the audience. But when you hear the f-bomb every fifteen seconds, it loses all its shock value and exposes that lazy writing. So while the movie never lost me, it never really captured me either. I was just along for the ride.

• 

  CinemaSerf

  Apr 17, 2024

  6
  Peter Capaldi seems to be in his element as the foul-mouthed political aide "Tucker" in this look at just whether it's the tail that does the political wagging of the dog. He has it in for the British International Development Secretary "Foster" (Tom Hollander) who finds an off the cuff quote during a radio interview plunges him into a debate on both sides of the Atlantic about a potential war scenario. "Tucker" thinks he can just railroad his opinion through by sheer force of nature and excessive Anglo-Saxon peppered invective, but the American side of this are a bit more subtle - and "Gen. Miller" (James Gandolfini) and State Department deputy under secretary for countries beginning with the letter C - "Karen Clark" (Mimi Kennedy) take "Foster" at face value and what follows in now a quickly paced game of manipulation, duplicity and spookily ambitious interns. At times this quite potently mixes the scenarios of a "Yes, Minister" edition with the writing sharpness of the "West Wing" but for the most part I just found it all a bit too repetitious and vulgar. I think "Judy" (Gina McKee) would have been perfectly justified attacking "Tucker" with a rusty stapler and after about fifteen minutes I began to wonder why she didn't. It's his unfettered obnoxiousness that robs the thing of even the faintest sense of realism. The aforementioned television series worked because the roots of their humour were based in something plausible, the humour was a little more sophisticated and the characters not so crass. Hollander does well though, the mouse minister who fills a chair with little ideology one way or the other, as does Chris Addison as the weathervane analyst "Toby" who really has mastered the art of straddling the proverbial fence with aplomb. For me, though, sorry - this lacks any form of class with the quickly paced but far too abrasive and unconvincing a lead character. It was made at a time when the chief of staff role to the British Prime Minister was under a bit of a spotlight, so it's an easy target for Ianucci to throw stones at - I just like my comedy a little more thoughtful and a little less custard pie.Read more

  Peter Capaldi seems to be in his element as the foul-mouthed political aide "Tucker" in this look at just whether it's the tail that does the political wagging of the dog. He has it in for the British International Development Secretary "Foster" (Tom Hollander) who finds an off the cuff quote during a radio interview plunges him into a debate on both sides of the Atlantic about a potential war scenario. "Tucker" thinks he can just railroad his opinion through by sheer force of nature and excessive Anglo-Saxon peppered invective, but the American side of this are a bit more subtle - and "Gen. Miller" (James Gandolfini) and State Department deputy under secretary for countries beginning with the letter C - "Karen Clark" (Mimi Kennedy) take "Foster" at face value and what follows in now a quickly paced game of manipulation, duplicity and spookily ambitious interns. At times this quite potently mixes the scenarios of a "Yes, Minister" edition with the writing sharpness of the "West Wing" but for the most part I just found it all a bit too repetitious and vulgar. I think "Judy" (Gina McKee) would have been perfectly justified attacking "Tucker" with a rusty stapler and after about fifteen minutes I began to wonder why she didn't. It's his unfettered obnoxiousness that robs the thing of even the faintest sense of realism. The aforementioned television series worked because the roots of their humour were based in something plausible, the humour was a little more sophisticated and the characters not so crass. Hollander does well though, the mouse minister who fills a chair with little ideology one way or the other, as does Chris Addison as the weathervane analyst "Toby" who really has mastered the art of straddling the proverbial fence with aplomb. For me, though, sorry - this lacks any form of class with the quickly paced but far too abrasive and unconvincing a lead character. It was made at a time when the chief of staff role to the British Prime Minister was under a bit of a spotlight, so it's an easy target for Ianucci to throw stones at - I just like my comedy a little more thoughtful and a little less custard pie.