sacrilegious? fandom opinion #393736
- Paul Eddington is harder to replace than Nigel Hawthorne
- Because Nigel Hawthorne was fantastic as Sir Humphrey and definitive and I’d never argue otherwise, but the script did a lot for Sir Humphrey
- While so much of Jim Hacker is in Paul Eddington’s physical performance
- Like I think Sir Humphrey will endure because a lot of him is on the page, while you need a comedic actor with the deftness of Eddington to not wind up with a Hacker who is too clownish, or too serious, or just a little off/unbelievable
You get no argument from me. They’re obviously both difficult to replace — totally peerless — but Hacker leaves a lot more room open for the actor, for better or (more likely) worse. I also think the fact that he’s a politician, even a reasonably sane one within the confines of comedy, makes the role even more difficult, since we’re predisposed not to side with them. Eddington had quite the enormous task in front of him and he isn’t given enough credit for the part he played (literally) in its success.