Jeeves and Wooster (1990–1993) User Reviews (48)

p.g. wodehouse- comic genius

[cobaka · 8/10 · 19 December 2006]

I watched the show before reading the books, but I absolutely adore both. As others have said, the casting of the two main characters is perfect, though i wish Fry could've had more of a chance to show off.

There are a few notable differences between the two mediums, none of which hamper the viewer/reader's pleasure any. In the show, for instance, Jeeves seemed to be more warm-hearted than in the books, where he seemed to me to be more of an untouchable impressive figure, almost cruel at times to Bertie, though always pulling him out of trouble in the end. Fry's portrayal was preferable to the books' character, for me, because I enjoyed the more casual relationship. In the books, Jeeves was almost a father figure, not nearly so close.

One reason i enjoy the show so much is the way it ignores pressing world issues. The prohibition is in full swing over in America, but that is only referenced in one episode. The depression is about to hit, and the entire world is going to feel it, perhaps even Bertie. I've always found this fact to make my viewing all the more interesting, because Bertie and his friends take their wealth so casually. The books are written from Bertie's perspective, and as it's plausible that he would ignore socialism and other radical reform movements, economic disputes, prohibition, and other strife synonymous with the 20s, then so would the show. It's a wonderful departure from reality, into a world where your only worry is how to weasel out of unwanted engagements to less-than-admirable girls, or how to avoid your overbearing aunt.

It's all of these things that really put the Wodehouse stories and their subsequent television adaptations close to my heart, but it's the lovable characters and the flawless portrayal of them by each respective actor that keeps me drawn to watching this show over and over again.

Great fun, a few nits

[emguy · 9/10 · 14 August 2006]

I'll second a lot of the comments already made here -- the great work done by Fry & Laurie, the spirit of fun, the parade of Brit actors who couldn't do American accents, the jarring cast changes -- and I'll add a couple more.

On the good side, the series captured an essential characterization from the stories that, in my experience, many readers of the original stories miss. That is, Bertie isn't the stereotypical upper-class idle rich twit. While he's lacking in book knowledge, he's not stupid; he has a flair for expression. While he often appears to lack sense, it's frequently because his helpful, generous, loyal nature takes priority over his personal dignity or common sense. He's a product of the class system, yet as a rule he's genial, generous, and non-condescending toward all. Laurie's portrayal captures the fact that Bertie is a "good egg." One complaint I had is that the later episodes sometimes descended into cheap, uninspired slapstick. Also in the later episodes, Jeeves did some very un-Jeeves-like things, like enthusiastically learning to play the same sorts of music he sniffed at in earlier seasons. The final episode of the final series stooped to a Benny Hill ending.

And isn't it ironic that the show hired all those British actors who couldn't do American accents, when Hugh Laurie has demonstrated that he does them very well? I've known people who've seen "Stuart Little" or "House" who can't believe Laurie isn't American.

Charming comedy

[a-ozornin · 9/10 · 19 January 2012]

Sometimes I get very nostalgic about good old British series, which had great sense of humor and a very light approach to entertainment. Whenever the nostalgia sets upon, I usually re-watch Sherlock to remind myself of the inescapable glorious walk of the progress, but this time I opted for Jeeves and Wooster instead. And I loved it.

Bertram Wooster is a wealthy gentleman who manages to get himself into trouble whenever he tries to solve other people's problems. Then it is the time for his smart and psychological butler, Wooster, to help to resolve all the troubles.

It is even difficult to say what it is so nice and exciting about the plot, but for some reason it works perfectly. The whole storyline can be summarized as "wealthy people have their own kind of entertainment" – it is difficult to imagine ordinary people getting themselves into the sort of troubles we see in Jeeves and Wooster. And the troubles that we see don't even look like troubles to us, making the series pretty entertaining and relaxing altogether. The good mix of jokes, particularly concerning the habits of the characters, makes you feel home in Britain of Jeeves and Wooster.

Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie, who play the lead roles, are absolutely brilliant. It is particularly fascinating to see them there young, without the weight of House or Holmes pulling them down. Poker-faced over-polite Jeeves and energetic big-eyed naïve Wooster make the whole series shiny and fantastically charming. Mary Wimbush, who plays Aunt Agatha, is as stereotypical of the wealthy aunts as it can possibly get.

The word of warning though: only the first 2 seasons are of the high quality. Unfortunately, the actors change pretty quickly, the interest of screenwriters wanes, and the series become pretty boring. Nevertheless, the first two seasons are outstanding and a great fun.

VERDICT: good old-fashioned British TV series featuring humorous Fry and Laurie.

WATCH: if you want to get back in time, enjoy some nice British humor or simply observe the life of wealthy.

m-picturegoer.blogspot.com

A delightful, classic series

[lauraeileen894 · 25 January 2006]

Long before he achieved stardom in the U.S. for playing the tortured, acid-tongued title character on "House, M.D.", Hugh Laurie played Dr. House's polar opposite, Bertie Wooster, on the British TV series "Jeeves and Wooster" from 1990 to 1993. With the help of his frequent co-star Stephen Fry, Laurie brought P.G. Wodehouse's beloved characters from the classic "Jeeves" series vividly to life. The TV series follows the misadventures of dapper, doltish young millionaire Bertie Wooster, and his indispensable, saintly valet Jeeves (played to poker faced perfection by Fry). Every story was convoluted and gloriously silly, with Bertie being tangled in one ridiculous situation after the other (usually of his own doing), but always coming out on the right side of it... and always with help from the relentlessly patient Jeeves. Many familiar characters are here, from cranky, meddling Aunt Agatha to Bertie's brainless chum Bingo Little. But Laurie and Fry are the real reasons to watch. Laurie somehow makes the foppish, clumsy Bertie truly lovable, and his rubber-faced mugging could put Jim Carrey to shame. Fry somehow keeps Jeeves from being bland and dull, and he is almost an omniscient being, the way he never fails at bailing his fatuous master out of trouble. Plus, he never gets annoyed at Bertie's constant mangling of popular songs while playing the piano (check out the pilot, where Bertie attempts Cab Calloway's "Minnie the Moocher", complete with the hi-de-ho chorus). So, is this a splendid little series worth checking out on DVD? As Jeeves would say, "Indeed, sir."

The acme of British humor

[Dr_Coulardeau · 10/10 · 22 February 2010]

This series is worth pure gold galore. It is British and that means the actors are absolutely excellent, the settings and the production are extremely fine and rich. The details are not neglected and that is a real pleasure. The best part is of course the work on the language, the speech patterns, and you can imagine the pleasure they take when the two characters move to New York. The contrast between the extreme aristocratic tone and intonation, the fascinating politeness of Jeeves, the Valet, and the American secular and even gross way of speaking with no affectation is a bag of diamonds on the screen. The action takes place in the 20s or 30s with some kind of fuzziness as for the time period. We seem to still be in the prohibition era, and at the same time not to be in the post 1929 depression. So we could be in the 1920s. That corresponds to the period Francis Scott Fitzgerald preferred for his rich idle young American men and women coming to Europe to enjoy their idleness in pure carelessness. But here these young aristocrats are constantly taken up in innumerable intrigues that have to do with their century old rivalries and jealousies, or their innumerable love affairs and hormonal capers. The main character is not so much Wooster, the aristocrat, but Jeeves, his valet, because he is the one who constantly builds the intrigues, thickens and even sickens the plots, in many ways manipulates his "master" into doing things he would like to do but can't do because he is a valet, a servant, and that would be too risky for him. He is also some kind of guardian angel for his "master" saving him quite often from total perdition at the very last minute. He is the champion of all escape makers and escape planners. But this series goes a lot further than that. We cannot say that the social content is that rich and that we could speak of social criticism. It is a comedy and does not intend to become a social drama or a social epic. That humor is English and only the British can produce it. It is both so elaborate and so extreme that it is hilarious from beginning to end. You thus have all the themes you need to really be humorous from a pure English point of view. You have them all, and even more. Old spinsters, old bachelors, plumbers, bobbies, Anglican priests, twins, old aunts and old uncles being fooled by young nieces and nephews, all kinds of grotesque characters, the fools and the crazies of this world, even some good Africans and judges. You cannot miss the all man's club and the impersonation of so many characters that we just wonder at times if we are not back in Shakespeare's Twelfth Night. Disguises, transvestites, foolish capers, you name it you have it. The rhythm of these parades is so diabolical that you can hardly follow them, even if they are predictable at times to the very second. But they are too funny for you not to play the game. The only missing character is the desert island and the marooned person there under his coconut tree eating ladyfingers. That is a must for those who like British humor, slightly black, definitely grinding to a crazy downfall, certainly not to a halt. I just wonder if we could not say it is a classic.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne, University Paris 8 Saint Denis, University Paris 12 Créteil, CEGID

Very Good Sir: The Fry-Laurie Jeeves-Wooster Brings Wodehouse's Stories Up to the 21st Century, Brilliantly.

[classicalsteve · 10/10 · 27 April 2007]

I do not believe that Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie played Reginald Jeeves and Bertie Wooster. The spirit of Wodehouse through the characters of Jeeves and Wooster infiltrated the living presences of Fry and Laurie and for 23 wonderful episodes walked the earth and brought us back to 1920's England. There is such a remarkable chemistry between Fry and Hugh that is magical and inexplicable.

For those who don't know the story, Wooster is the stupid aristocrat who leaps into turbulent waters without looking and his valet, Jeeves, must rescue him from drowning in bad judgment. However, Jeeves is incapable of instilling any kind of good sense into his employer, although he always tries. In many ways Jeeves and Wooster is a modern day "Marriage of Figaro", however here the lower social class mentors the upper and even saves them for themselves.

Bertie is not the only fool populated in Wodehouse's world. Much of the young male English upper-crust is portrayed as bumbling inept fools who have too much time on their idle hands, conniving and scheming in strange and frivolous exploits. And Bertie Wooster is the quintessential heir to not only stupidity but a large family fortune. In short, Bertie is a scatterbrain's scatterbrain who would bet (and lose) the entire family estate on the local sack race and then have to explain to his Aunt Agatha that it was a sure thing. But his plans do not end with monetary exploits. Bertie would push a young boy off a bridge in order that one of his colleagues would rescue him in order to impress a young woman, only to have it backfire. It is Jeeves who always comes to the rescue. Jeeves is far more worldly. His understanding of human nature is in direct proportion to Bertie's lack of good sense. Wooster and Jeeves go together in much the same way as Kirk and Spock.

Some in the aristocracy apparently complained of Wodehouse's portrayals of the upper classes which is to be expected. The unspoken and yet apparent message of Jeeves and Wooster, aside from the entertaining comedy that monopolizes the forefront of the stories, is an interesting criticism of privilege. Whether or not this was Wodehouse's intention is debatable, but the underlying message appears quite apparent.

Although harmlessly benign (except being his own worst enemy), Bertie Wooster is a cherry short of a fruitcake, and yet is bestowed with all the advantages of a young aristocrat. He studied at Eton and Oxford University, yet little of his studies remains with him, except for his aptitude at sophomoric pranks. Jeeves, on the contrary, has much practical knowledge to boot and can quote Shakespeare with ease. But Jeeves is from the working class. Jeeves might have excelled at a place like Oxford but would not be accepted because of the social status of his family. He can only secure a job as a valet to an idiotic aristocrat who was handed these things to him on a gold-rimmed platter and takes for granted the status given to him. And yet, with all the tom-foolery exhibited by Bertie Wooster, the Jeeves tales may have in fact re-enforced class distinction in Great Britain although it was often scorned by the upper classes. The lower classes needed Jeeves to remind them of the oft inferiority of the upper class. Jeeves gives them an outlet to express the unfairness of privilege and its inherit hypocrisies. I hope these stories not only entertained but have given the middle and lower classes reason to insist on changing the hierarchical landscape: a meritocracy instead of an aristocracy. Jeeves would have definitely approved.

What a Difference!

[burrhus1 · 10/10 · 30 January 2008]

Anyone who has seen Hugh Laurie in TV's House won't recognize him as the bumbling Bertie in this series. What an incredible goofball!

Of course, each episode has the same basic plot:

1. Bertie encounters an uncomfortable social situation amongst his wealthy early 20th century British friends and relatives. 2. Bertie asks his butler Jeeves' advice. 3. Jeeves' advice gets him into much deeper trouble. 4. Bertie thrashs around to extricate himself but fails. 5. Jeeves comes to the rescue with a risky but brainy solution. 6. Bertie escapes by the skin of his teeth. 7. Jeeves quietly takes credit for the escape and escapes blame for

creating the trouble.

So, you probably wouldn't want to watch 5 or 6 of these in a row. But, in small doses, these are great!

The Very Best

[eh_Jacx · 10/10 · 22 January 2007]

This show is full of surprises and so much fun to watch. Brightens a bad mood every time. I had to go out and get a book and it's just as good. These actors are the very best to play Wooster and Jeeves. Jeeves seems to have been engaged to every girl that he has ever met. Jeeves has cousins all over the place that keep coming up in conversation. You would think that Jeeves would have been the millionaire and Wooster would be the butler. You know throughout the episodes that Jeeves is the one with the brains. Wooster lacks reasonable thinking and depends on Jeeves to think for him and help him out in every situation he gets himself into. This show gives me a warm innocent feeling of days gone past. The language, and the scenery alone is worth watching Wooster and Jeeves for. Jacqueline

A View From Across The Pond

[The_DATo · 9/10 · 27 October 2022]

Allow me to begin my post by referencing a comedic American movie called 'Big Night'. At one point in this film, after experiencing the fare of a lavish feast prepared by an excellent Italian chef, a young American woman is seen crying. When asked why she was crying she replied, "My mother was such a terrible cook." Such is my dismay when comparing American comedy to British comedy. I must confess that I came to the party late and met the writers Wodehouse, Munro and Jerome in my more mature years. Perhaps this was for the best as I can appreciate them better today than I might have before imbibing decades of American sitcom inanity.

Though I have read a few opposite opinions in these reviews I thought the series captured the essence of the books quite well. The characters of Jeeves and Wooster were, in my opinion, masterfully imagined by Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie as were the characterizations by all members of the supporting cast. Wodehouse's biting satire of the British upper class, much like the writings of H. H. Munro, was very cleverly engineered, and the overarching premise of the upper class being at times as desperately dependent upon what Bertie might call "the proper feudal spirit" of the lower classes (as the titled characters of the series often were upon Jeeves) did not go unnoticed or unappreciated by this observer - a satire worthy of Swift.

Salutations to my British cousins across the pond and my gratitude for sharing your excellent television productions with us ..... umm ... despite that unfortunate ruckus back in the 18th century.

Classic.

[diayag · 9/10 · 18 December 2006]

I agree the cast changes, and definitely the loss of the original Aunt Agatha, affect reaction to the series as a whole, but not necessarily individual episodes or seasons. To see characters switch from one role to another unrelated role was a bit disconcerting. The series 3/4 Gussie was a bookie in series 1; the original Marilyn Bassett becomes Florence Cray in 3/4. It was a monumental task, however, to put all 50 stories into one shorter body of work and this does the job well. I agree somewhat, about the accents: Janan Kubba's New York accent was delightful if odd. The mistake in most Brit productions is they don't hear a difference between Americans and Canadians. Some actors were Canadians and hence (apparently) sounded American to the BBC. I can tell the difference between a Northern dialect, Londoner and Welshman but was stunned tonight (for instance) watching a BBC production ("Carrie's War"), in which an "American airman" was identified as being from Pennsylvania (where I live) and having a southern drawl. Maybe we are picky; maybe we are more conscious because we watch more Britcoms than the average American. And maybe the majority of Englishman wouldn't notice that "aboot" is not something you'd hear south of the Canadian border. These are minor. The later episodes ARE more ridiculous and goofy, but I watch them on a regular basis. Laughter is precious; this is a clean, non-demeaning, and very pleasant escape that even the young members of the household can enjoy. How rare is that?

More hits than misses

[keith-moyes · 6/10 · 12 January 2010]

I missed this series in its many TV outings and have only just caught up with it on DVD. Knowing how much Fry and Laurie love Wodehouse, I was hoping for good things. Overall, I am slightly disappointed with it, but it is still enjoyable and I wouldn't want to discourage anybody from giving it a view.

Stephen Fry was born to play Jeeves, but Hugh Laurie's Wooster is too broad for my taste. His mugging and 'silly ass' mannerisms are overdone, particularly in the first two seasons. However, he does tone them down after that and the shows benefit as a result.

Surprisingly, this appears to be only the second attempt to televise what is undoubtedly one of the great literary double-acts of the Twentieth Century. There was a series in the 60s, with Dennis Price and Ian Carmichael, but Wodehouse was scathing about Carmichael's 'middle-aged travesty' of Wooster, so it probably wasn't much good.

There may be a reason for this relative neglect. Good books don't always make good dramas and I think Wodehouse gave the screenwriter (Clive Exton) a couple of problems which he never entirely solved.

Firstly, the material doesn't really fit the fifty-minute format. The short stories are slightly too short and the novels are far too long.

Exton's approach to the short stories is to intertwine two (or more) into a single episode. This is usually done quite adroitly, but often the individual stories lose crucial scenes and fail to build up their full comic momentum. In most cases, I think it would have been better to stretch single stories to the required length rather than to condense them in this way.

With the novels he took three different approaches. Some he pared down to the bare bones, retaining the central story elements but stripping away all the sub-plots. In others, he pulls the different sub-plots apart and reassembles them as two separate, consecutive, stories. Neither approach really works. Wodehouse took great care with his plot construction. Much of the humour in the novels is in the way that incident piles on incident, so that poor old Wooster's life becomes 'one damn thing after another'.

Only once does Exton simply break the novel in half and present it as a two-part story. Even here, he has to simplify too much (there is probably enough material for three episodes).

The second problem is more fundamental and may be insoluble. While the incidents and the characters are funny in themselves, the genius of the books lies in Bertie Wooster's unique narrative voice, with its evocative slang and its elaborate hyperbole. The books are not just about what happens, but how Wooster perceives and relates it. He turns 'making mountains out of molehills' into high art.

It is the same with characters. No actual Aunt Agatha can possibly be the intimidating old dragon of Wooster's imagination. This is even more true of the wonderful Madeleine Basset. She can be depicted accurately and amusingly (Elizabeth Morton has a good stab at it) but no performance can hope to be as droll as Bertie's designation of her: "a droopy, soupy, sentimental article."

Of course, Exton could have given Wooster a voice-over, but there would be a danger of making the shows too wordy. As it is, he obviously felt that some of the stories were a bit short on physical action. To strengthen them visually, he makes radical changes to the plots and adds scenes and bits of physical comedy that have no counterpart in the books. Sometimes these amendments work well and the slapstick elements integrate seamlessly into the general tone of the stories, but on other occasions he is less successful. There are a couple of truly terrible ideas that Fry and Laurie should simply have refused to sanction. In particular, putting Wooster in drag was deplorable enough, but Jeeves in drag was unforgivable: shame on you, Mr Exton.

The great Jeeves and Wooster series has yet to be made. However, if P G Wodehouse is to your taste, then this series has more hits than misses.

Only the most uncompromising Wodehouse purists will fail to get enjoyment out of it.

PS: If any actor wants to know how to play Bertie Wooster he should check out the audio books read by Jonathan Cecil. He is spot on.

Comedy of the aristocracy

[nicovdk-54575 · 10/10 · 17 October 2018]

This early 90's British comedy-drama promises to give you a new dilemma at the start of each episode and a happy ending at the closing of each episode. It illustrates British aristocracy of the late 1920's and early 1930's. The production value is magnificent with fantastic locations, a wonderful wardrobe and cars that befit the era.

The casting of Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie in the title characters was perfect; since they are friends and have done previous comedy together they play of each other with incredible ease. Mr Laurie is perfect as Bertie Wooster with his musical talent shining through and Mr Fry as Jeeves the valet (gentleman's gentleman) shows his intellectual acting abilities.

At the end of series four you are sad to see the show end with its wonderful and foolish characters. You won't be able to see more of Wooster's crazy antics and Jeeves's ingenious plans and schemes. You also realize that with all the characters and their different relations or acquaintances to the title characters that the valet Jeeves and his gentleman Wooster had the best and closest partnership or friendship, a bond which you were invested in and wish you could witness longer.

The show is an adaptation of stories written by P.G. Wodehouse, unfortunately this reviewer have not read any of his stories and therefore cannot give commentary on the relation between the television show and the short stories.

Recommend this show to everyone who wants some lighthearted comedy with a fantastic English vocabulary.

Sometimes great, but dated, repetitive, with two racist episodes

[johnnymonsarrat · 6/10 · 28 July 2019]

I was such a fan of this series when it first came out. It inspired me to read several of the books, and I've met and greatly respect especially Stephen Fry for his advocacy.

The show is great because of its premise, which satirizes the powerful, elevates the working class, and where Jeeves lovingly approves of Wooster's good character if not skill set ("He shows promise and I may make something of him.") I also love the old time setting, mansions and costumes, and the magical lifestyle of the idle rich. Wodehouse wrote through war and depression without mentioning them. It's a pure fantasy.

I must also note the chemistry between the two leads. There is a lot of great humor, too.

However, rewatching the show in 2019, nearly 30 years after it was made, the show I originally loved seems dated. Sometimes the plot twists are a delight. But often the plots are repetitive (I can't believe we're still repairing Gussie and Madeline's engagement in Season 4).

These days we're used to binge watch TV with strong casting and an overarching storyline with characters that change over the seasons. Jeeves and Wooster displays its era's interchangeable episode format, intended for viewers who might miss an episode, where nothing changes. At least they don't have a laugh track, something I find unwatchable in old shows.

From season to season, main characters are played by different actors, which is confusing, undercuts our growing fond of characters, and seems to break a basic rule of casting: put them in multi-year contracts.

Finally, and I can't believe other reviewers haven't mentioned this, two episodes (Season 2 Episode 5 and Season 4 Episode 6) have blackface, which there was no excuse for in 1990. Modern productions can and should update their source material, which of course I understand was written in the 1920s. When white actors dress in blackface, they reduce Africans to stereotypes, an exotic costume. This is especially jarring in the idyllic, endless summer that the show portrays. It's a racist part of the original books that should have been more completely excised.

Some episodes of Jeeves and Worcester (1990-1993) are true classics, 10 stars. But taken as a whole series, and in the context of what to watch today, I've reduced my rating to 6.

10 stars for Season 1; the rest are dismal mockeries

[AthenaPN · 5/10 · 5 June 2021]

Definitely watch the Season 1 of this brilliant series & then say goodby. The joie de vivre of this daffy, cheerful satire on the 1920s British upper crust sparkles throughout the first season which appears to have had a very great deal of effort put into it. Sadly the production then coasted on that effort, cookie-cutter creating following episodes & changing important secondary character actors willy-nilly, totally cutting the legs out from under the series as a whole.

The two leads are always a joy to watch but the sparkle that illuminated the series as a whole is just not there after Season 1.

great fun, if inferior to the books

[dr_foreman · 28 June 2005]

"Jeeves and Wooster" is a wonderful showcase for Hugh Laurie and Steven Fry, two of my favorite comedians. Their performances carry the series even when the writing starts to falter in the final season.

But the original P.G. Wodehouse books are, it should go without saying, better. Bertie Wooster's narration of his own adventures is hilarious, and much of his bizarre "wit" is inevitably lost in translation to TV. Thankfully, though, Clive Exton's scripts do retain an enormous amount of Wodehouse's original dialogue, which really can't be beat.

All the plots are the same, of course; Wooster is either helping a friend get married, or trying to avoid getting hitched himself. Somehow, though, this repetition doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the series; in fact, it's sort of a wacky bonus. I find that, if anything irks me, it's that some of Wooster's friends are total jerks or weeds who really don't deserve his help - though I suppose that's part of the joke. The oily Gussy Finklenottle drives me absolutely nuts, especially in the first two seasons!

The production values are surprisingly lavish, especially for British TV (though there is a rather lame recreation of the Empire State Building in one episode). The period detail is impressive, and the music is great. The casting is mostly spot-on, too, though some of the guest actors perform a little too grotesquely, and certain very important characters are re-cast midway through the series. It's quite distracting when a major character like Madeline Basset is suddenly played by a new actress, especially when the original Madeline later shows up playing another character, Florence. Thankfully, some of the best cast members stay the course.

There's a definite change in tone after the first two seasons. The show gradually becomes weirder, and when you get to the later episodes Wooster is suddenly getting shot at, jumping off boats, etc. But there's plenty of great material throughout the whole run, and I highly recommend picking up the whole set on DVD. I don't even mind the American characters, who seem to take a lot of heat on this site; aren't the bad accents silly on purpose?

Ultimately, what makes this series so memorable is its offbeat combination of different elements - it's like a comedy of manners, a musical, and a goofy slapstick routine rolled in one. I didn't really get it when I was a kid, but I think it's a hoot now, and Wodehouse's commentary on the laziness of privileged people and the fickleness of love still feels very relevant. Great stuff.

The example of British humour

[krivitsky-m · 8/10 · 6 April 2012]

Pelham Greville Wodehouse is a British novelist, most commonly know for his humorous novels. He is that kind of writers, who makes us smile after every sentence. While we watch his character drinking, we are expecting another joke and getting it. His characters are partly ridiculous, partly funny, partly arising sympathy, but always real people, not just paper dolls. Wodehouse lets them be sincere in their expressions. His sense of humour may annoy some fans of modern humorous writers, but in fact, he is a classic of British humour. I would rather read his novels about Jeevse and Wooster instead of his other novels just because of more jokes. I would have better firstly red novels, then see screen version, but I had to see series firstly and then to read novels.

So, Bertie Wooster is on of those young English aristocrats of the first third of the XX century, who get all their money from their parents, so they can spend time in all kinds of entertainment instead of work. So Bertie is. Of course, he got Iton and Cambridge education and we from time to time see him recall some citations of philosophers and writers, always incorrectly however. Because of his not quite smart mind he gets in trouble in every novel and without help of his servant Jeevse he would not have solved any problems.

And Jeevse (his name isn't mentioned) is Bertie's servant. It's a type of ice-cold polite gentle English servants, outlined with love. He seems to be well-educated and to have a sharp mind. He can find the way out of every difficult situation using his knowledge of human psychology. He also succeeds in attempts to get a desired himself result from Bertie (e. g. to force him not to play the trombone annoying Jeevse).

This duet seems to be one of the best comedic duets in comedy films. Fans of «House M. D.» indeed will be pleasant to look at his idol in the youth. And other spectators may just enjoy the series. I don't give «10», because there are no ideal films, sad but true.

Fantastic

[iakovos-78637 · 10/10 · 22 June 2022]

I really enjoyed this tv series. A quality rarely seen today in tv series. I will watch it again. British comedy at its best. I highly recommend it!!! 10/10.

Perfect Casting and About as Good a Literary Adaptation as You Can Find!

[grendelkhan · 9/10 · 14 December 2014]

Jeeves and Wooster is the perfect blend of writing and casting. PG Wodehouse is one of the giants of English humor and a prodigious author. His best known characters are Bertie Wooster and his valet and tremendous intellect Jeeves. Jeeves first meets up with Bertie when he is deep in the hold of a massive hangover and Jeeves conjures up the cure to end all cures. From that point on, the pair are inseparable, except for brief moments of insanity, usually caused by Bertie.

The stories are the epitome of the servant who is more able than the master. This is especially true as Bertie is the scion of a wealthy family and pursues no work (though he will flee from it). He is an amiable chap, who tends to get on well with most people, apart from his domineering Aunt Agatha, the odious Roderick Spode, and the occasional nemesis. Bertie spends most of his time visiting friends and relatives or passing the time at the Drones Club (aptly named for a group the produces very little). More often than not, it is this circle of friends (or relatives) that pulls Bertie into some farcical situation from which Jeeves must extricate him, via his massive brain power.

Jeeves is the brains of the outfit and his advice and intellect are sought by all. he is content to serve his master, who he sees as a good soul, provided that he learns his place when it comes to selecting his wardrobe, wearing a mustache, and keeping himself from harm's way (read: marriage). Jeeves keeps the wheels spinning, solves the problems, and devises schemes to maintain his position and influence.

The rest of the characters are made up of the monied classes, with names like Bingo Little, Tuppy Gloster, Madeline Basset, Barmy Fortheringay Phipps, and Gussy Finknottle; all uniquely English names, and ones that require money to exist. There is Bertie's more likable aunt Dalia, who pulls Bertie into some scheme to gain Jeeves brainpower, often relating to her publication, Milady's Boudoir. It's all silly, often confusing; but always fun.

Clive Exton does a masterful job adapting Wodehouse and watching the program is much like reading the books and stories. Hugh Laurie is the perfect Bertie Wooster, an amiable idiot and Laurie knows the type well, and played it often, before House came calling. Stephen Fry has the brains to match Jeeves and excels at portraying Jeeves steady manner, and cunning nature. he is precise in his movements, as a master servant would be. He's younger than the literary character; but perfectly suited to the man. The rest of the cast would shift a bit and characters can be a bit confusing because of the recasting and similar personalities. Wodehouse had little use for the monied types, though he came from that world. He pokes fun at them at every turn and makes a delightful concoction out of them.

The series is at it's best for the first two series, and at its weakest in the fourth; but, even weak Jeeves & Wooster is heads and shoulders above the rest. There is a sameness about many of Wodehouse's stories and characters, though they are still delightful, all the same.

If you love farce or character-driven humor, the series will delight and if you just want good writing and acting it has it in spades. The series brought me to Wodehouse and I have relished the man's work ever since.

Just Excellent....

[steven_torrey · 10/10 · 25 November 2014]

The implausible to the improbable to the inevitable to the catastrophic and back again--all delightfully and whimsically portrayed. Perfect casting of Stephen Fry as Jeeves the Butler to Hugh Laurie as Bertie Wooster--inept gad about.

Only the Brits know how to make television brilliant. Whether it is "Foyle's War" or "As Time Goes By" or "Jeeves and Wooster." Americans simply cannot make these living room dramas the way the Brits do; Americans put too much high gloss on their productions that ultimately detracts from the production.

P. G. Wodehouse is the brilliant writer who first penned Jeeves and Wooster to paper--and as always, the books should be read for the sheer pleasure of reading how comedy works in prose. But even without knowing or reading P. G. Wodehouse, this series is truly a pleasure to watch. The dialogue, the situations, the dancing, the music, the production values. And yes--British or Canadian actors trying to mimic American accent, rhythms, slang and idiom is part of the charm of the production. Maybe that's what is meant by American gloss; an American production would get bona fide American actors to provide the 'correct' reading without realizing how much is lost with that quest for perfection--how glossy the perfection ends up giving the production.

P.G. Wodehouse began the Jeeves series in 1919 and produced the last one in 1970; he was a prolific writer and collaborator of songs with Jerome Kerne and Cole Porter--he provide the story for Porter's musical "Anything Goes." He lived from 15 October 1881 to 14 February 1975.

"Jeeves and Wooster" is now available on line thanks to Youtube and worth every minute watching.

Just one word sir "Eulalie"

[mouserd · 9/10 · 24 October 2019]

What ho!

No spoilers so you'll have to watch the show to find out what "Eulalie" means but its great when you do.

Jeeves and Wooster is a comedy series where each episode takes its time getting to the punchline and I think a good thing too.

Hugh Laurie (Wooster) the epitomy of the upper class English twit is as perfectly cast as his ever eriodite gentlman's gentlman Stephen Fry (Jeeves). These two go hand in glove together at what I would say is their best work.

The early seasons are the best told but even the worst of this series is A class.

Set before the great depression (roaring twentys ) with all the Ludicrousness of that swing era.

Taking shots at the many excentricities of the era from class struggle, matrimony all the way to the rise of local facism (just remember Eulalie) and international travel, it will make sense in its own insane way when you see it through.

While not perfect it is ambitous and hits the target 9 out of ten times for me. It does take its time to tell each story so this show is for those with patience.

So if you like Hugh Laurie & Stephen Fry this is the one to see.

The First Two Seasons Are A Masterpiece; 4 and 5, Horrible

[tomas-842-817258 · 10/10 · 9 March 2019]

This is Steven Fry and Hugh Laurie at their very best. Season One sparkles with fantastic performances and writing, and season two continues that.

BUT, and this is a big BUT, Season Three is misfires spectacularly, and Season Four unwatchable... it's that bad.

A textbook example of how the studio suits can ruin a brilliant work of art.

Get 1 and 2. If you're not hooked after Jeeves cleans Bertie's room, there is no hope for you.

DgedBrings a smile

[adbodin · 9/10 · 21 October 2022]

When your are feelin blue, this is perfect. Both are perfectly cast and it makes me want to be of the privileged set. From the first moment that Jeeves hits Bertie's life you know this is going to work, and good news there is no spoilers from me. We are gradually introduced to this life that Bertie enjoys, the country romps, the crazy dinner parties, to the club. Ahh yes, the club. I am waiting for my membership to come through. I know I will not be black balled, after all I am of appropriate heritage.

So hopefully you get the sense. Get some chocolate, maybe a glass of your favourite tipple and enjoy, .after all it is Friday!

The funniest comedy series

[o_levina · 12 November 2001]

Brilliant P.G.Wodehouse stories lose nothing from transfer to the screen. Of course, some series are better, some are worse, some are real masterpieces. In fact, I like all of them. Adaptation is really wonderful: amusing, dynamic, intelligent and sparkling with wit and humor. Leading actors are awesome. Hugh Laurie gives an unforgettable comic performance, masterfully imitating manners and way of speaking of typical young aristocratic idiot. Stephen Fry seems to be an unparalleled Jeeves. All series are well casted, though performers of several parts change. I especially like Elizabeth Morton as Madeline, Charlotte Attenborough as Stiffy and Richard Garnett as Gussie. The series entertain and cheer you up. As for me, I can't help laughing while watching them.

Quirky

[AvidTv_watcher1 · 10/10 · 18 June 2020]

Quirky 1920s tv adaptation. Great acting all round. Lighthearted watch.

Superb!

[lizs1289 · 10/10 · 29 November 2022]

We already had this on DVD but happen to come across an anniversary edition (2011) that had been digitally remastered - very impressive. Well worth the money to see the terrific Hugh Laurie and Stephen Fry in almost crystal clear film. They are the ultimate interpretation of the characters Jeeves and Wooster. I have not come across any other actors who can embody them so perfectly.

Hugh Laurie's comic portrayal is pitch perfect. Stephen Fry, although younger than the character in the book, portrays Jeeves so wonderfully.

The Art Deco setting is beautiful. I'd love to live in Bertie's apartment!

Still an enjoyably funny series after 30-something years and several viewings.