9 Responses to 200,000 copies of each Dwarf DVD sold in the UK!

Jump to bottom

  1. Buggeration! That’s amazing. So, 1 in 300 Britons have seen our film?

  2. And the reason why people won’t fund the movie is…why?

  3. Maybe the script is shit. :)

  4. I’ll tell you why it’s not been funded – ?14 million is a hell of a lot of money for an independent British movie. To put it into context – Shaun of The Dead was ?2.3 million…

  5. I’m sure I remember Doug saying at one point that he’d be happy with a mere ?7 million.

  6. “Buggeration! That’s amazing. So, 1 in 300 Britons have seen our film?”

    Not necessarily. I haven’t seen it and I own the DVD.

  7. “I’ll tell you why it’s not been funded – ?14 million is a hell of a lot of money for an independent British movie. To put it into context – Shaun of The Dead was ?2.3 million…”

    “I’m sure I remember Doug saying at one point that he’d be happy with a mere ?7 million.”

    Actually why can’t Doug do the film on a smaller budget than ?7 million? Let’s be realistic here – they did series VII on a shoe-string and that looked cinematic, the CGI was awful for that but far more convincing computer effects are cheaper these days and the model shots for Doctor Who are fabulous. Things like the tank appearing on the horizon in that Jane Austen episode were achievable within the limitations. Everyone has learned from series VII and won’t repeat the various mistakes that occurred there. I’m not wanting to sound contrary or ridiculous but I can’t figure out what the money would be used for. Fees required to anonymously populate Red Dwarf? There was a convincing atmosphere of shit-loads of people achieved with the extras in Shaun of the Dead. I know loads of ambitions in the Red Dwarf series were cut down or removed entirely due to cost issues but we’re talking about the meagre budget for one episode (or even an entire series) compared with any number of MILLIONS for 80 minutes of movie.

    Something really significant must be making this movie impossible without a very particular budget, and it’s quite alarming. Doug wouldn’t be holding the project up unless he needed to. But the passing of time is surely a similar issue? Not only are the Dwarf crew increasingly aging beyond the original character outlines (will this be addressed and will we end up with characters suitably re-written more according to the ages intended before the young cast took the parts?) but people might well argue that the ripest time for Dwarf has been and gone. I feel that the golden era of the Simpsons is behind us and that the best time for a movie would have been then; the film of the Simpsons that I understand is in production could either bring about a renaissance or just pass everyone by as the spin-off of something well past its sell-by date. The problem is that when something has been around for DECADES it’s going to be pretty much impossible to stoke up the enthusiasm it had at its peak. People get fatigued. Doctor Who on the other hand took the imaginations of many generations of children and their families, and it’s that nostalgia and fondness that after a gap of 17 years could revive it with great bells and whistles. DVD sales of Dwarf might be great but I’m not sure that it has the same status. Maybe some years from now it’ll have something similar but if we want the same cast a line needs to be drawn somewhere. I’d rather Doug go ahead on a lower budget than for it never to happen, and I really hope the age of the characters thing is addressed. I don’t know when versions of the movie script were first formed, but from now onwards they need to reinvent the characters as 40+ year olds, frankly.

    Somebody else continue this, I’ve lost momentum.

  8. Actually why can’t Doug do the film on a smaller budget than ?7 million? Let’s be realistic here – they did series VII on a shoe-string and that looked cinematic, the CGI was awful for that but far more convincing computer effects are cheaper these days and the model shots for Doctor Who are fabulous.

    Indeed. I don’t know how much VII cost per episode, but the only expense over Series VII I can think of is large quantities of 35mm film stock.

    Some of the best Red Dwarf is contained in the simple episodes.

    I don’t know what all the money is going to be used for to be honest.

  9. I get the feeling part of it is that Doug’s just got very frustrated by Dwarf’s budget – see his little rant about Ace’s light bee pod in the VII documentary. However, as you rightly say, CGI has got better and cheaper recently – just look at Tikka Remastered.

    And yes, personally I can’t see how artistically, the film is likely to be better than the best Dwarf eps.

    BUT – I reckon that seeing as that’s what Doug wants to do, it doesn’t make a huge amount of sense to just want a Series IX. I’m gonna wait and see how the film turns out – and then judge all that kind of thing. He could (and, I suspect, *does*) have very specific things he wants to do that could only be achieved with a bit of budget behind him.

    Of course, there is the thing that if the film is a success, everyone will get a lot more money than what you’ll get off the BBC – which, artistry or not, is likely to be a consideration!

Jump to top / Jump to 'Recent Comments'

Leave a Reply