I dont even think they ARE using that style are they? I didnt get any hint of improv of this at all and you yourself used the term 'lightly'. They are using the exact same style they used for the film and previous show this is based on. Not really some attempt at being in vogue.


The profanity in this was incredibly tame compared to the UK version. If anything they held back. The profanity in the UK version was also based on the kind of language heard irl by these people.

I dont think The Office is a good comparison. Its more satire.

There was nothing about the amount of profanity that seemed at all out of place or sloppy.

I rendered an opinion, which you can agree or disagree, but to state it's not correct is ridiculous.

Are you rebutting a post somebody made in your head? Both responses to your post are obviously opinions as well.

That said- the vast majority of reasonable people would consider what you said laughably incorrect.

TBH i wish Veep had someone like Malcolm Tucker

i liked it

Was okay. From 5-15 min I didnt laugh once and nearly gave it up. The ending was better and I get the impression it will improve as the actors learn how to work with each other better. There were a lot of jokes that felt like they should be funny but the delivery was off. Considering that I like most of the actors in this, I expect that to improve

I liked it alot. Weird for me seeing Anna Chlumsky, she still looks exactly like Vada in My Girl. But she was really good.

I found it really enjoyable, but it did take a bit of time to ramp up right. It has really fast paced dialog, which means there's a lot of potential to miss a lot of the jokes. Most of the character interactions were really good, and that's what will keep me around.

Pretty much exactly what I was expecting. I liked In The Loop okay - I thought it leaned a bit too much on a few crutches - and I see these same crutches present in Veep. Still, I enjoyed it, and I like the people involved, so I'll probably keep watching.

The show definitely needs a Malcolm Tucker, but ill keep watching and generally enjoyed it even if i thought it was a bit flat compared to In the Loop and Thick of It.

As much as it pains me to agree with cres, I disagree with this. There was one bit especially where they were in the car talking about the Senator's communications guy and they just kept calling him a **** over and over, talking a book with a cover of ****, just really beating it to death. It felt like it was a hey, we're on HBO, we can swear! moment. I'm not saying that the only way to do a political show is with Aaron Sorkin dialogue, but I felt like it was just too much, something about it just didn't feel authentic to me. Will probably watch the next few episodes, but the pilot didn't grab me.

I think that had more to do with the fact that the guy was a ****.

Obviously it was super profane, but it felt authentic. Maybe it's just because I'm that profane in real life, but I never felt like it was being done for the sake of doing it.

And people who are that profane generally annoy me. Swearing for the sake of swearing is not funny unless you are 11.

This was one of my issues with In The Loop in that too much of its humor seemed to be out of profanity. So that I think is the weakest point so far, but there seem to be good pieces around it.

Just think of it as an Armando Ianucci trademark of sorts. The swearing on Veep is pretty mild compared to some of the stuff on Thick of It and In the Loop, its nothing to do with being on HBO and being all "now we can swear, lets use all the words we cant on NBC" or whatever.

I'm also profane irl but it's not to be funny, it's just part of my vocabulary. I'm actually kind of embarrassed to think there may be people out there that think I'm trying to be funny when I'm just talking.

I liked it a lot after it got going. I did get the improv feel that fsoyers is talking about, though. I'm hoping it improves but I'll keep watching, regardless.

Armando Iannucci. I can't say how it compares to In the Loop / The Thick of It, but all the Alan Partridge stuff (which I highly recommend) I think is pretty scripted.
Some parts came across as quite scripted, while others seemed as though they let the actors try a few improv takes (I think most noticeably with Walsh).

More or less this, except I liked In The Loop a lot more than you. I think a problem with the show is that the aesthetic is basically the exact same as In The Loop and The Thick of It so "exciting new pilot" is more "retread of something i like". The only way the profanity felt forced to me was that it appears everyone in the universe is profane, granted it's only after one episode so I will wait and see. The idea they are using the fly on the wall style because it is in vogue is wrong ... unless you feel the original took from the UK Office.

All of the performances were really good, I especially liked Walsh and Chlumsky and there I had a couple literal lols, which is more than I can say for a lot of shows these days.

This show doesn't need a Malcom Tucker, no one would come close to Capaldi's performance and it would stick out like a sore thumb.

+1 to Pudge.

Pretty underwhelming but I will give it a few more episodes..the director of communications guy who is in a million comedies was really unfunny to me

It's a stretch to say that the show is using swearing a lot or using the Office style camera thing due to trendiness because both of those have been Iannucci's style for a long time.

My personal opinion is that swearing is like any other types of dialogue, in that it just has to be used the right way. I personally think Iannucci is the opposite of "swearing just for swearing" -- something like the **** scene with Chlumsky wouldn't have worked with any other word ("crap" doesn't work because nobody says "that guy is a crap" etc). Plus a lot of the humor in this show especially comes from the contrast between the Veep and her staff swearing and yelling at each other behind the scenes, then having to put up this calm facade when giving a press conference or meeting with someone. The swearing actually serves a function imo.

Thought it was pretty strong for a comedy pilot, they are so tough to get right. Like the cast quite a bit so have high hopes.

I was very disappointed in this. I don't think you can make a comedy in this setting/context without taking a stance on one side or the other. Trying to be politically neutral is not really unique satire, it's just a The Office retread. Settings were extremely authentic though which was surprising.

this show would be horrible if it took a stance on one side or the other.

I'm fairly sure she's portrayed as a slightly right leaning Democrat. The "green" stuff is your clue. The clue that she's right leaning is that she's willing to back off of everything when challenged, and go cuddle up with the other side. The other Senator, or whatever she was, was being made fun of for being ridiculously centrist. It's left leaning, but it's not super overt. It's left leaning like Parks is left leaning, if that makes sense. Those are both about as centrist as you can get, while still giving subtle clues as to what it really is.