As econonomic documentaries go, this was one of the best I've seen in the UK. Once people recognise that it was deliberately polemic, serving to balance out existing biases in the mainstream media (as opposed to provide a grounded, impartial account), I think it should be added as a staple of economics courses up and down the country.
In terms of improving economic literacy through the use of metaphors I think it was highly effective - even The Guardian commentator conceded that "it brought the economic theory brilliantly to life". Using a running bath to show that there's still more public debt being added than is being removed through Osbourne's "cuts" was excellent. Showing an ailing patient and trying to remove blood from one arm only to pump it into another (spilling some on the way) was useful. I even thought the lobbying children - driving home the point that the debt burden is a future taxation and therefore deeply undemocratic, was effective. And indeed exposing politicians for not knowing the difference between the budget deficit and the public debt, was hilarious (and tragic).
Of course there were problems. The interviews with Brendan Barber and Alistair Darling came across more as Ali G style stich ups than revelations. I'm not convinced that public sector spending is now larger than the private sector, and I think a fair rejoinder would be to at least acknowledge that Labour's public spending record might make the debt burdon easier to pay. Debt isn't a problem in and of itself - it depends on what you are using it to fund. If it's comsumption (as much of it undoubtedly was) then indeed you have a problem. If it's investment, then that's part and parcel of economic growth. When Durkin showed how the salaries of front line services are a small fraction of overall spending, he might have pointed out that it is because so much of Labours's spending splurge went on salaries rather than capital investment that we will struggle to pay it off.
And of course it featured Kelvin McKenzie. And for that reason alone critics have a fair criticism.