Rob Andy readin’ Titan, yes sir I’ve been around News Posted by Ian Symes on 6th February 2026, 16:20 Well then. Exactly five years to the day that Rob Grant told us that he wanted Red Dwarf flying out of our buttskis, it seems we’re a little over six months away from the first scheduled flight. Thanks to our Czech mate barbucha in our forum for spotting that a novel called Red Dwarf: Titan is beginning to turn up in online listings, with a release date of July 16th. An all-new prequel, and the first Red Dwarf novel in thirty years with Red Dwarf creator Rob Grant returning alongside Andy Marshall, creator of sitcom 2point4Children and Quanderhorn! Before the beginning. Before the accident that wipes out the crew, the mining ship Red Dwarf is in orbit around Titan, and the crew is heading down for shore leave, all with different intensions… However, their objectives are scuppered somewhat unexpectedly when they receive a cryptic message. A message from the future. Two feuding crewmen are catapulted into a breakneck race to save not only this but every other Reality. So strap yourself in – the Dwarfers are taking on TITAN. This novel is the perfect reboot for those who have never seen the series but also full of wonderful Easter eggs for the fans. Rob mentioned the possibility of turning his spin-off proposal into a novel back in November; given that even the Doug-helmed, original-cast version of Red Dwarf can’t get on telly these days, a prequel getting commissioned seems even less likely, so we’re delighted that the story will see the light of day in hardback form. We just hope that the full novel will have better copy editing than the synopsis, so as not to scupper the writers’ good intensions. Very intrigued about the message from the future, especially considering Doug’s latest proposed special involved Lister reaching out to his past self – have these two great minds been thinking alike? We’re sure there’ll be more details soon, these isolated appearances on obscure online stores are often the prelude to a proper publicity campaign. This is very exciting – as the blurb says, the first Red Dwarf novel for thirty years, and the first major new Dwarfy material of any kind (Out of the Gloop notwithstanding) from one of its co-creators since that last novel. With Rob teaming up with Quanderhorn and Nether Regions cohort Andrew Marshall once more, we’ll be fascinated to see how similar the style is to Backwards, or whether it will feel like a whole new voice. But mostly, we’re just delighted with this semi-confirmation that 2026 will be a year with brand new Red Dwarf material for us all to discuss. Time to dust off the Book Club jingles…
Yep, if this.is happening then it’s very welcome news indeed. After the recent Book Club rereads, I’m keener than ever to get a new Rob Grant Red Dwarf novel, even if it’s an unconventional one.
So it is! It’s also sandwiched between my 40th birthday, and me, Cappsy and Danny going on a caravan holiday together.
Wasn’t sold out for me, I just bought it through this link – https://www.ivybridgebookshop.com/products/9781399636094?srsltid=AfmBOoo8jMaO6AovRnVfSUSCVGSUqo5Ol4IpJxp24lPdwTEa-sY0SEOS
Very exciting news. I’ve said for a while books are the way to go for Red Dwarf now. I’m glad someone is finally doing it. I am a little put off by the whole prequel thing though. Why is it the longer an idea runs the chances of looking back rather than forward, or reboots come up. Why not just pick up and carry on from the end of Backwards? Anyway, very excited to read and discuss this with you all and the inevitable podcasts.
Rob Andy readin’ Titan, yes sir I’ve been around Well done on coming up with what might be the most tortuous pun that’s ever appeared on this site.
I am a little put off by the whole prequel thing though. Why is it the longer an idea runs the chances of looking back rather than forward, or reboots come up. Why not just pick up and carry on from the end of Backwards? I can’t remember exactly where we learned it, but I think that under the legal agreement Rob is limited to prequel-type stuff for the time period of his Red Dwarf content, so that it doesn’t tread on the toes of what Doug might be doing.
I am a little put off by the whole prequel thing though. Why is it the longer an idea runs the chances of looking back rather than forward, or reboots come up. Why not just pick up and carry on from the end of Backwards? I can’t remember exactly where we learned it, but I think that under the legal agreement Rob is limited to prequel-type stuff for the time period of his Red Dwarf content, so that it doesn’t tread on the toes of what Doug might be doing. Oh yeah I do remember that. Still a bit shit.
Almost seems like Rob might try and do a Star Trek 2009 thing with this. Adding some connection to the original red dwarf timeline, but branching off into a new one. Might be totally wrong about that. Red Dwarf has hit that went on to long situation so lets get wibbly wobbly with it to keep it going. But then to be fair the novels were in a different universe and so was Dougs planned movie.
Why is it the longer an idea runs the chances of looking back rather than forward, or reboots come up. Why not just pick up and carry on from the end of Backwards? What others said, plus it’s also a natural consequence of aging writers. It becomes more enjoyable to dwell on past glories when they were at the peak of their powers rather than keep pushing to make something totally new. Especially when the world that Red Dwarf was created in is totally different now.
I’m more interested in a reboot than a continuation at this point, tbh, it’d be interesting to see Rob essentially take a fresh stab at the characters free of continuity.
I believe the DwarfCast is now 2 and 0 for releasing right before a big bit of news drops (last one was that the show was officially dead).
I believe the DwarfCast is now 2 and 0 for releasing right before a big bit of news drops (last one was that the show was officially dead). It’ll all help to push the Masked Singer item off the front page in case it’s not Danny.
Colour me excited. I’m not mad keen on the prequel thing either but any kind of new Red Dwarf novel (co-)written by Rob or Doug is very much something to eagerly look forward to.
Finally, for once in my fucking life somebody is using the word “reboot” correctly and not as a blanket term for any sort of IP revival.
Finally, for once in my fucking life somebody is using the word “reboot” correctly and not as a blanket term for any sort of IP revival. But if it being used that way is such a rare occurrence, can you really call it correct? I say this as someone who does lament the contradictory definitions of “literally” and “nonplussed”. I just don’t have enough influence in society to stop them.
I preferred the way it used to feel like they were used, where reboot specifically meant you were resetting an IP with a whole new cast (i.e. Star Trek 2009), and revival meant you were doing a direct continuation with either all or some of the original cast (i.e. Comedy Central Futurama). I just find it mildly annoying that every time I see the word “reboot” now I have to wait for additional context to know what they actually mean by it. That said, I have no way of guaranteeing that this was ever the use case and it wasn’t just the way I interpreted it when I was much younger.
I’ve just bought my copy from… oh um The Gay Pride Shop? https://gayprideshop.co.uk/collections/lgbtq-pre-order-books/products/red-dwarf-titan-signed-copy
I preferred the way it used to feel like they were used, where reboot specifically meant you were resetting an IP with a whole new cast (i.e. Star Trek 2009), and revival meant you were doing a direct continuation with either all or some of the original cast (i.e. Comedy Central Futurama). I just find it mildly annoying that every time I see the word “reboot” now I have to wait for additional context to know what they actually mean by it. Totally fair. I wonder if the propagation of the blanket definition of “reboot” is due to how often a new iteration of a TV or movie series is commissioned/announced before any details regarding narrative continuity are confirmed. Even knowing the cast isn’t necessarily enough, because e.g. Doctor Who (2005) is the “revival” type but has 0 returning cast from the classic series. In a business sense it’s all the same phenomenon, and saying “reboot or revival” every time would be a bit awkward. Either way it would be good if reports were less vague, where possible. “Hard reboot” and “soft reboot” are right there to be used.
Even knowing the cast isn’t necessarily enough, because e.g. Doctor Who (2005) is the “revival” type but has 0 returning cast from the classic series. Doctor Who 2005 is an interesting one because until it confirmed the direct continuity with the version that came before it, it could have been either a reboot or a revival.
“It is a parallel-universe storyline focusing on young Rimmer and Lister as bunkmates on a rundown, crime-ridden Titan before the original series’ radiation leak.” It’s about the Lister from the alternate dimension that Chloe’s Kochanski came from, hence why the Gay Pride bookstore is stocking it and listed it under LGBTQ+. Or not.
I mean it’s new Red Dwarf content, which is something, but it’s also a prequel and by someone who’s not written Red Dwarf in 30 years and is quite possibly a TERF so I’m going to take it as take it with a shrug. But it could be good.
Grant Marshall! 2point4961 irradiated haggis! I can’t remember exactly where we learned it, but I think that under the legal agreement Rob is limited to prequel-type stuff for the time period of his Red Dwarf content, so that it doesn’t tread on the toes of what Doug might be doing. Doug’s special pitch isn’t all that different circling around pre-radiation leak Red Dwarf. I mean it’s new Red Dwarf content, which is something, but it’s also a prequel and by someone who’s not written Red Dwarf in 30 years and is quite possibly a TERF so I’m going to take it as take it with a shrug. But it could be good. Is this based on anything other than Rob Grant’s choice of who to follow on X formally known as Twitter?
Informally known as Twitter. As for reboot/revival, while I too dislike the linguistic tangle, it coincided with moving away from the late 2000s early 2010s remake craze (usually stealing the original unsubtitled name forcing us to insert years) so I will put up with it. Anyhow, full cast audio book please.
Doctor Who 2005 is an interesting one because until it confirmed the direct continuity with the version that came before it, it could have been either a reboot or a revival. See also Doom 2016. Or you can just do the tortured bit of having it be the old protagonist’s kid or something.
Is this based on anything other than Rob Grant’s choice of who to follow on X formally known as Twitter? It was specifically liked tweets rather than simply follows.
I’m so old fashioned that I weep at a novel being called “Red Dwarf content.” It gives me flashbacks to Chris Barrie’s website. Which is never a good thing.
Hoorah a new Red Dwarf adjacent thing. Hoorah a new Rob Grant written novel. Oh a new Red Dwarf writer, Welcome Andrew, you will be judged also. Oh it’s the guy Douglas Adams wrote Marvin as a parody of, I’ve a pain in all my diodes thinking about that. Oh it’s Rob’s Quanderhorn writing partner. Sets expectation level to fairly ok & interesting. It’s the expected prequel then, arriving within what sounds like the allowed timescale of agreed rights window. Oh so TV/Streaming no luck, no animation, no Radio it would seem, no mention of publisher? so this is the modern independent publishing world then. As a fan man who’s just crowd funded David Renwicks kickstarter… for Jonathan Creek (10 years on) play book, with the return of Maddy Magellan from Idiot Box Books… I’m happy and excited we get something actually released, whatever method. A books a book. Oh if it makes it past the disappearing online link only stage that some books don’t get over. Oh if it doesn’t cross any “Rights” line that it shouldn’t and gets delayed. Sees release date. Looks at The Official Convention website for any mention and ponders the possibility that “Convention rights” are a Doug area. Rolls eyes at the timing, knowing I won’t be reading that weekend. Wonders if Nottingham has a Waterstones also, what’s going on now. Finds it ironic that I’m seeing 10%er Clive Francis in a play in the west end today. That’s my thoughts for today. Hang on Rob said a while back he might get a pre-accident Kryten into the timeline somehow. Marvin might be writing Kryten?!?! ( Head explodes & rusty right leg falls off simultaneously while folding a sheet & talking to its Mattress.)
Reboot is a dead word as of the 2020’s. Probably the last nail in the coffin is James Gun’s Peacemaker2. It’s all now just Multiversal perspective, closely linked or distant third cousins twice erased. This shouldn’t matter too much in The Red Dwarf Omomomniverse, where books, and TV change elements much more often than listers socks, and are just as often at odds with each other and themselves.
I’m so old fashioned that I weep at a novel being called “Red Dwarf content.” I hope to instead eventually read, Warbodog read a new Red Dwarf book, wept, laughed & was content.
Reboot is a dead word as of the 2020’s. Probably the last nail in the coffin is James Gun’s Peacemaker2. Pffft, it just copied Red Dwarf with each series being set in a different universe.
Reboot is a dead word as of the 2020’s. Probably the last nail in the coffin is James Gun’s Peacemaker2. It’s all now just Multiversal perspective, closely linked or distant third cousins twice erased. A word is dead when people stop using it, which hasn’t happened. Hard reboots may be rarer nowadays, but they still happen, and in spite of the retconning deployed to bring Peacemaker into it, James Gunn’s DC universe absolutely is one. But this kind of thing may have contributed to the prevalance of the blanket definition of reboot, because if a TV show appears to be in all regards a (hard) reboot – no character crossover, different setting, no plot continuation – but they throw in a reference to the events of the original series in a random Season 3 episode, thereby “confirming” that it actually takes place in the same continuity, are we all supposed to say “ah, so it was actually a revival, not a reboot, all along!”. Fuck no, I say. Star Trek ’09 is a reboot regardless of Nimoy’s Spock showing up, Baywatch ’17 is a reboot regardless of Hassellhoff’s Mitch showing up, and Iron Man is a Marvel reboot regardless of Spider-Man: No Way Home eventually happening. Under the more strict definition, these are just my opinions, but if “reboot” is a more general term for when an IP is brought back after going away or being cancelled, then they’re just true – no need to get lost in the weeds for these edge cases. A reboot is a reboot is a reboot. Also, “reboot” gets used for non-fictional things like game shows too. Are those all actually revivals, because they take place in real life? … OK, I have officially said “reboot” too many times and now it sounds weird.
If you’re annoyed by the reboot/revival thing, wait until you see how often the word “remaster” gets thrown around for videogames that are, in fact, remakes. Words don’t mean anything anymore.
It is strange and unfortunate that they both can’t just tell Red Dwarf stories without taking ownership of certain periods. I get the sense thst even if you say reboot that Rob Grant probably has to set all his material pre-red dwarf radiation leak. Because it stops being a prequel at that moment. And that while Doug was going to do a time travel story with a young lister and rimmer it was probably still within the shows timeline that it wouldnt count so much as a prequel. And since Rob wants his own part of the universe to play with so liberties will 100% be taken to make it feel like what you would expect from Red Dwarf.
Remake – completely new take on the same old story Revival – Literally a continuation of what we last saw. Reboot – A new story/spin-off set in the old continuity. That’s how I define it in my head. A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) is a remake. It’s retelling the same story. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystall Skull/Dial of Destiny are revivals. They’re continuing in the same vein as what came before. The new Ghostbusters films are reboots. They’re still set in the original world, but they have a different focus and new leads.
That’s a new one, I’ve never heard reboot used in that context. To me, reboot was basically a franchise-wide reset, basically allowing for remakes, new directions and spin-offs and an entirely new continuity. Remake isn’t broad enough a term to quite sum it up. Anyway, Titan. Allowing for Rob’s swift unfollowing of unsavoury types on Twitter – I lost an online community and a well liked band because of TERF bullshit recently, so I’m very wary, but his quick move away from that stuff is a good sign, so consider that slack cut – I’m still pretty meh about this. I get that it’s the area Rob’s been given, so it’s not necessarily his first choice, but I can’t help feeling unexcited by prequels. I’m trying to think if there’s ever been one I’ve really enjoyed. An episode that explores an unseen part of the past can be great, the pre-accident stuff in Infinity is a wonderful expansion of the world of the show, but as a setting for an entire new branch of storytelling, especially one that seems like it’ll be trying to take familiar elements of the show and reworking them for an era they’re not from… it feels too convoluted for my liking. I’ll buy it, I hope I’ll love it, but… well, my hopes are pretty low. The fact that I either like or love all of Andrew Marshall’s solo sitcoms and enjoyed the pair’s radio stuff does, at least, bode well for some good writing. I do find it… strange that it’s coming out as a book through seemingly quite small channels? Given that Red Dwarf is arguably the most successful ‘comeback’ comedy the UK has ever had, it’s really odd that this isn’t bigger. The animation would never happen, obviously, but I do wonder about radio. The pair had success on Radio 4 in the past, did they pitch this? Did Radio 4 really turn it down? And if so, why is it so hard to get Red Dwarf made?!
> Remake isn’t broad enough a term to quite sum it up. Remake suggests to me, very closely doing the same thing over again. Of course there’ll be differences but fundamentally it’s the same movie or show being told just updated and made with modern tech etc A reboot is, as you say Debris, allowing for new continuity, new directions, new stories. Completely resetting and restarting the thing to do something differently Classic example of remakes is often the US doing its own version of a Japanese or European film. Though there are of course plenty of other samples of films just being remade 30 years later. Maybe reboots are more closely associated with franchises, thinking back to comics where they just start over with what we would now (and actually have for a while) consider a completely different timelines with different events, often different characters etc
“Reboot” for me is turning something completely off and then beginning again from scratch. A complete start over. A remake is when you take something and re-interpret it in a new way – and can have varying degrees of closeness to the original. A revival is bringing something back in the same form as a continuation of its previous self. Being brought back from the dead, essentially. A remaster is when you take the original thing, go back and polish it up by using the highest-quality source materials that you can, and then slap a low-quality jpeg of a Skutter over the first scene.
Reboot – A new story/spin-off set in the old continuity. That’s how I define it in my head. The new Ghostbusters films are reboots. They’re still set in the original world, but they have a different focus and new leads. That fits your definition. Yes. But I see Answer the call as the Reboot or remake of Ghostbustes. I see Afterlife & Frozen Empire as Nostalgia legacy Sequels to the Original Ghostbsuters I, II & even The Video Game. Personally. I see reboot as meaning a reset button is pressed erasing all from memory and starting again.
I do find it… strange that it’s coming out as a book through seemingly quite small channels? I was wondering if it might be a case that the details for the book/arrangements for signed editions etc have been sent around pre-announcement and some of the “smaller channels” have put the listing up earlier than they were meant to. We had an independent HMV-type shop near us who used to just put new DVDs on sale as soon as they received them because they didn’t give a toss. I remember watching the series 4 finale of ‘Auf Wiedersehen Pet’ a week before it aired because I went in and they had it on sale.
no mention of publisher? Orion, according to the Ivybridge listing. Thanks Dave. I take back my ill informed comments as that sounds much more higher profile in publishing and I expect a more robust proper announcement of this hitting bookshops and more than, just an online shipping.
I’m quite interested in the world of Dwarf between our time and the time line of three million years post stasis. Especially if it’s funny and sci fi. But I have never been of the opinion that solo Grant projects are as good as his Dwarf co writing. If this is as inventive as Colony & The Strangerers (Both of which I love) then I will be thrilled at his achievement. With no expectations that it would be as good as any other Red dwarf or certainly the bubble episodes. Based on his into the gloop timeline I expect Titan to not care about being a timeline that matches up eventually with the end. A timeline the show throws away it’s self very early on often too. I like the clear line between Doug & Rob Eras. Doug is the band member that stayed, Rob is the leaver who now wants to tour again. I’m excited and hope he does a reading or two event wise, (with Andrew R̶i̶d̶g̶e̶l̶y̶ ̶ Marshal)
I quite enjoyed ‘Dark Ages’ at the time (I think I had some art of it printed in BTL, come to think of it!) but I suspect a rewatch wouldn’t be wise.
I quite enjoyed ‘Dark Ages’ at the time (I think I had some art of it printed in BTL, come to think of it!) but I suspect a rewatch wouldn’t be wise.
Someone should tell Danny John-Jules they’re excited for the book on Twitter. I wonder if a Barrie audiobook is in the works, since he still does them.
Oh it’s the guy Douglas Adams wrote Marvin as a parody of, I’ve a pain in all my diodes thinking about that. Is this true? I had never heard of him pre-Quanderhorn. Both the audiobook and radio series for Quanderhorn are on Google Play, which is nice to see to skip any DRM.
Personally. I see reboot as meaning a reset button is pressed erasing all from memory and starting again. Just to add for anyone here who favours the “it’s only a reboot if it includes a 100% continuity reset” definition: if every time your reboot your PC your hard drive gets wiped, that’s not meant to happen. You should get that checked out.
Personally. I see reboot as meaning a reset button is pressed erasing all from memory and starting again. Just to add for anyone here who favours the “it’s only a reboot if it includes a 100% continuity reset” definition: if every time your reboot your PC your hard drive gets wiped, that’s not meant to happen. You should get that checked out. No but it does give you a fresh start with the same IP (OS) and characters & concepts (programs) whilst clearing out the RAM (the accumulated history)
The real question is: if someone does a film/TV adaptation of a book/play that’s been adapted into a film before, does that count as a “remake”? Is it fair to describe the famous Humphrey Bogart version of The Maltese Falcon as a remake (because there had been two previous versions), or was it just another adaptation of the book? Was Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet a remake of Laurence Olivier’s Hamlet? Was Man of Steel a remake of Superman? Casino Royale (2006) was – along with Batman Begins – one of the films that popularised the term “reboot” because it reset/restarted Bond continuity. (Though it wasn’t a reboot in behind-the-scenes production, since it carried across the same producers, same writers, same composer, one main actress, and a director who’d done a 007 film before.) But does it also count as a remake of the 1960s Casino Royale, which was a book adaptation in name only? These are the sort of fascinating matters we can discuss while we wait for Red Dwarf: Titan to be released!
The real question is: if someone does a film/TV adaptation of a book/play that’s been adapted into a film before, does that count as a “remake”? I would say yes. Even if it’s not intended to harken back to the original film, it’s still a re-made version of the same story. Denis Villeneuve’s Dune is a remake, because Dune has been done before.
The real question is: if someone does a film/TV adaptation of a book/play that’s been adapted into a film before, does that count as a “remake”? I would say yes. Even if it’s not intended to harken back to the original film, it’s still a re-made version of the same story. Denis Villeneuve’s Dune is a remake, because Dune has been done before. I’m going to say no. Total Recall, for example, has two film versions. The second is so much closer to the original text. The first can more accurately be described as being inspired by the Asimov’s story whilst the second, not a remake of the first film but a completely separate film based on and more accurately depicting the source material. Man of Steel draws heavily on comics released post Christopher Reeve films. And Reeve’s films don’t in anyway take any story from the comics other than Superman’s origin. I think “remakes” have to be retelling the same original story again. Think of it more like a cover version that a band might do of a song, rather than a band writing a song in the style of something they’ve been inspired by
Oh it’s the guy Douglas Adams wrote Marvin as a parody of, I’ve a pain in all my diodes thinking about that. Is this true? I had never heard of him pre-Quanderhorn. Both the audiobook and radio series for Quanderhorn are on Google Play, which is nice to see to skip any DRM. Ahem…
No but it does give you a fresh start with the same IP (OS) and characters & concepts (programs) whilst clearing out the RAM (the accumulated history) OK, if your PC’s RAM just accumulates until you reboot, that’s also something that’s worth bringing up at a computer repair shop.
Oh it’s the guy Douglas Adams wrote Marvin as a parody of, I’ve a pain in all my diodes thinking about that. Is this true? I had never heard of him pre-Quanderhorn. Both the audiobook and radio series for Quanderhorn are on Google Play, which is nice to see to skip any DRM. While Douglas acknowledges Marvin was an “eyore” like character from Winnie the Pooh, and asked for a voice close to Clement Freud, it’s also in biographical detail that when Douglas, and Andrew marshal and his then writing partner David Renwick of One foot in the grave/jonathan creek fame were all at university together, they would be in groups at party’s and Andrew would be the Negative downer talker about whatever current situation was being talked about at Cambridge. He would write this into sketches at footlights theatre and then in Hitch hikers. While Renwick and Marshal went onto Radio success too with a sketch comedy that was sometimes seen as the new Monty Python, called The Burkiss way to dynamic living. This sketch show included a sketch from Douglas Adams about a kamikaze pilot who returns home a lot after failing to find the target. Later after Marvin and Hitch hikers is a big success, later series of Burkis way would write mocking jokes and sketches about Hitch hikers, Adams and his love of restaurants. Getting a few into Not the nine o’clock news & smith and jones books also. He split with Renwick after writing Alexie Sayles Stuff. They had done the Wilt film screenplay and a sitcom called whoops apocalypse with John Cleese in it. Lots of ITV stuff that more forgotten than BBC comedy is.
Yeah, he was a pretty prolific writer at one point – with Renwick he also wrote Hot Metal, End of Part One and If You See God Tell Him, and alone he wrote 2point4 Children, Health and Efficiency, Dad, some Poirot episodes, and a long-forgotten horror series called Strange. With Renwick he also wrote for Not the Nine O’Clock News, Cannon & Ball, Dave Allen, the Two Ronnies, Kenny Everett and, erm, Jim Davidson, but I’d imagine he prefers to forget about the latter. I’m not sure what he’s done for most of this century, possibly theatre work.
if every time your reboot your PC your hard drive gets wiped, that’s not meant to happen. You should get that checked out. I’ll be real, I can’t remember the last time I’ve heard reboot used in the computer context. It’s always restart now.
I’ll be real, I can’t remember the last time I’ve heard reboot used in the computer context. It’s always restart now.
The real question is: if someone does a film/TV adaptation of a book/play that’s been adapted into a film before, does that count as a “remake”? No. Is it fair to describe the famous Humphrey Bogart version of The Maltese Falcon as a remake (because there had been two previous versions) No. Was Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet a remake of Laurence Olivier’s Hamlet? No. Was Man of Steel a remake of Superman? No. Casino Royale (2006) was – along with Batman Begins – one of the films that popularised the term “reboot” because it reset/restarted Bond continuity. (Though it wasn’t a reboot in behind-the-scenes production, since it carried across the same producers, same writers, same composer, one main actress, and a director who’d done a 007 film before.) But does it also count as a remake of the 1960s Casino Royale, which was a book adaptation in name only? No. These are the sort of fascinating matters we can discuss while we wait for Red Dwarf: Titan to be released! No.
no mention of publisher? Orion, according to the Ivybridge listing. Thanks Dave. Ah yeah makes even more sense that Gollancz is an imprint and they do all Rob’s books including his Quanderhorn collaboration.
He split with Renwick after writing Alexie Sayles Stuff So what you are saying is… Doug should team up with David Renwick to write his novelization? Ahem… And I did not know Google Play (usually) allows downloading audiobooks in 2019, I only figured that out when my wife got us in a book club a year or two ago and I did not want to use Audible.
What I’d really hope for is an audio version. Chris did such a brilliant job on the first two that it was like listening to actual Dwarf. Craig on Last Human was…listenable. Rob, himself, doing Backwards was…not listenable. Really hope Chris can be asked to voice this.
I mean it’s new Red Dwarf content, which is something, but it’s also a prequel and by someone who’s not written Red Dwarf in 30 years and is quite possibly a TERF so I’m going to take it as take it with a shrug. But it could be good. Yeah, let’s not forget finding the list of people Rob was following on Twitter before he knew that we could see who he was following on Twitter…
Slightly concerned there’s a touch of the ChatGPT about that “So strap yourself in — ” but not a touch of spell check about that “intensions.” I want to be more excited about this than I am. I’m sure in terms of the craft it’ll be a well-written and probably very funny book but if it’s Red Dwarf without fifty percent of the regulars, is it really Red Dwarf? Just hoping Rob doesn’t fall into the trap of thinking “lore” is the same thing as telling a story. The talk of Easter eggs has me worried too, that sounds a bit like it’ll be full of stuff designed to go, “You remember this, don’t you? Don’t you feel clever for remembering this?” Then, before you know it, you have music cues and visual references from 40 years later appearing in your Doctor Who reconstruction just so people can fill out the trivia section of a wiki. While it’ll be an immediate purchase, I’m gonna be a bit cautious with my excitement for this one. Didn’t reckon much to Gloop, if I’m honest, but that is obviously doing something very different and more short form. More Dwarf is better than no Dwarf.
Slightly concerned there’s a touch of the ChatGPT about that “So strap yourself in — ” but not a touch of spell check about that “intensions.” I want to be more excited about this than I am. I’m sure in terms of the craft it’ll be a well-written and probably very funny book but if it’s Red Dwarf without fifty percent of the regulars, is it really Red Dwarf? Just hoping Rob doesn’t fall into the trap of thinking “lore” is the same thing as telling a story. The talk of Easter eggs has me worried too, that sounds a bit like it’ll be full of stuff designed to go, “You remember this, don’t you? Don’t you feel clever for remembering this?” Then, before you know it, you have music cues and visual references from 40 years later appearing in your Doctor Who reconstruction just so people can fill out the trivia section of a wiki. While it’ll be an immediate purchase, I’m gonna be a bit cautious with my excitement for this one. Didn’t reckon much to Gloop, if I’m honest, but that is obviously doing something very different and more short form. More Dwarf is better than no Dwarf. I absolutely detested Gloop – it was total cringe, as the kids would say. But I have hopes for this. He’s been good before, and his collaborator certainly knows their shit*. *Just worth pointing out that I originally typed “his collaborator certainly knows they’re shit”, so I think that’s all outcomes covered.
And I did not know Google Play (usually) allows downloading audiobooks in 2019, I only figured that out when my wife got us in a book club a year or two ago and I did not want to use Audible. I’ve recently discovered libro.fm – the Audible subscription model but not Audible. You also choose an independent bookshop to support with your sub and the audiobooks are all DRM free.
I think of Into The Gloop like Red Christmas. They aint meant to be taken seriously. They are just short, silly and a little gimmicky. This will probably feel like Robs true return to Red Dwarf. But given the concept it will probably feel a little weird too. It won’t feel traditional, but its a prequel with liberties so what do you expect?
It would never split this way, but my dream for 2 separate Red Dwarf series by Rob and Doug would be for one to tell stories with the Series III-V lineup, and for the other to tell stories with the never actually seen Back to Earth “Series 9 and 10” lineup. Female Holly and Kochanski are so underserved by both the canonical episodes and the previous novels, and there would never be a way to cleanly reunite the classic cast in the same series because of the multiple Hollys, so this would be a great opportunity. However, I will nonetheless accept this alternate timeline prequel with great enthusiasm, and hope it’s successful enough for us to also get Red Dwarf: Kit and Red Dwarf: Custer.
I don’t think Book Kochanski is really under-served. She performs a very specific narrative function, and does it impeccably. It’s not until Doug tries to turn her into a main character in Last Human that it feels she’s underwritten, but that’s because she’s exceeding her original purpose and Doug had almost nothing in mind for her.
Oh, for sure, she’s not underserved if you believe that ‘almost nothing’ is actually the correct amount to serve her. I don’t, though. The books work well as they are, but we absolutely could have got more of Kochanski’s voice and perspective and it could have made them even better. I just want her to be a proper character like they were at least trying to make her in Series VII, not just a plot device/figure of yearning like in IWCD/BTL, and not a generic crew member like in Last Human.
Question – what’s the best female character in Red Dwarf? Leaning towards Nirvanah Crane, myself. Or Pree.
For me, Into The Gloop is a very specific thing of its own, written to a certain brief, and I don’t think you can evaluate it on the same terms as other Red Dwarf. I don’t feel like it tells me anything about what Rob’s Titan will be like. Oh, for sure, she’s not underserved if you believe that ‘almost nothing’ is actually the correct amount to serve her. I don’t, though. The books work well as they are, but we absolutely could have got more of Kochanski’s voice and perspective and it could have made them even better. I just want her to be a proper character like they were at least trying to make her in Series VII, not just a plot device/figure of yearning like in IWCD/BTL, and not a generic crew member like in Last Human. I’m in two minds about this. I can understand the desire for Kochanski to become more rounded and complete a character, and to see things from her perspective – but I also feel like she’s a bit like Fiji, and Lister should never really attain his goal of seeing her again because it takes away from what drives him; and the more he sees of her, the less of an abstract distant dream she becomes. I think even Stasis Leak severely dilutes the idea of finding her being his ultimate goal, because it takes any jeopardy out of the whole thing by revealing that he does, and soon.
Doug didn’t know how to write for Kochanski. She isn’t a character that fits the dynamic. In series 7, Doug played on her upper-classness as a comedic point. Then for Series 8 he kinda dropped that. I assume because fans were a little critical and so it was felt she should be less stuck up i guess? And by the time Back to earth was made, its a little clear even Doug is acknowledging he didn’t really know how to make Kochanski to fit in
Question – what’s the best female character in Red Dwarf? Leaning towards Nirvanah Crane, myself. Or Pree. Recurring? Series VII Kochanski probably gets the biggest variety and most substantial stuff to do, but Hattie!Holly gets funnier jokes. For one-off characters I think it might be Camille. Dr Lanstrom is also one of the programme’s most memorable villains, even though she’s not in the episode for long. (It’s cheating a bit to say Arlene Rimmer and Deb Lister, since they’re twists on the main characters rather than separate characters in their own right.)
I’m in two minds about this. I can understand the desire for Kochanski to become more rounded and complete a character, and to see things from her perspective – but I also feel like she’s a bit like Fiji, and Lister should never really attain his goal of seeing her again because it takes away from what drives him; and the more he sees of her, the less of an abstract distant dream she becomes. I agree with you, but only for as long as the show actually sticks to that idea. Even if Stasis Leak hadn’t undermined it by confirming that Lister definitely would marry Kochanski in 5 years (or that it not happening after 5 years is enough to bring back the stakes), Series VII has happened now too, so there’s no putting the genie back in the bottle. Now that Kochanski is just a normal woman who is around somewhere and not the personification of Lister’s happily ever after, they might as well make the best of it. And the novels are a similar situation, as he did end up with Kochanski at the end of Better Than Life. (Plus Kochanski was already around for the pre-accident part of IWCD, so they could have fleshed her out in that part – or at least given her a second line of dialogue.) Although I’ve never been fond of the idea of “finding Kochanski” as a major drive for Lister anyway. If Kochanski is going to remain off screen, she should be a reminder of what he’s lost, the opportunities that he unknowingly let pass him by. He pines for Kochanski not because she’s his real soulmate, but because she represents the normality that is now gone. In terms of motivation, “getting back to Earth” is a difficult but at least vaguely plausible goal, and it’s something that’s has genuine meaning for his life. “Settle down with a woman you fancied who you barely spoke to before she died 3 million years ago” is neither.
Well when you think about it, since Doug brought Kochanski into Series 7/8 and then wrote her out of BTE, that means we had Series 10,11,12 and TPL with no Kochanski. And if thats the last piece of TV Red Dwarf we get… Kochanski being written out has had no resolution. Its just a plot point that Kochanski from Series 7 and 8 just disappeared and wasn’t seen again. Im sure many fans ain’t that bothered either, but what a way to treat a character when you think about it.
I’d absolutely love to know what he was going to do with the character in the early drafts of X when she was going to come back in Entangled.
I’d absolutely love to know what he was going to do with the character in the early drafts of X when she was going to come back in Entangled. It would have been fucking hilarious if after all that build-up she just got the same airlock death as Irene ended up getting.
I would actually fucking kill to have a Series X script book, like the VIII one but containing drafts of episodes before they were torn to shreds or replaced.
I think “oh fuck the actor playing the chimp has just arrived on set and it turns out there are limits on how long he can legally work in the costume that make the last ten minutes of the episode impossible to film” and “oh fuck we can’t do any location filming and the two episodes with the return of Kochanski are impossible to film” were two separate, unrelated fuckups. The original ending to Entangled was Lister and Rimmer bickering about who was going to look after the chimp like an old married couple which doesn’t seem like Kochanski was ever meant to be in that one.
What I’d really hope for is an audio version. Chris did such a brilliant job on the first two that it was like listening to actual Dwarf. Craig on Last Human was…listenable. Rob, himself, doing Backwards was…not listenable. Really hope Chris can be asked to voice this. While I agree Chris’ impressions are good, there is no reason they couldn’t do a full cast reading too.
What I’d really hope for is an audio version. Chris did such a brilliant job on the first two that it was like listening to actual Dwarf. Craig on Last Human was…listenable. Rob, himself, doing Backwards was…not listenable. Really hope Chris can be asked to voice this. While I agree Chris’ impressions are good, there is no reason they couldn’t do a full cast reading too. I think if it’s new timeline. New continuity. Younger characters than the cast are. And by the sound of it a different tone and vibe, that any narration should be from a completely fresh narrator/performers.
What I’d really hope for is an audio version. Chris did such a brilliant job on the first two that it was like listening to actual Dwarf. Craig on Last Human was…listenable. Rob, himself, doing Backwards was…not listenable. Really hope Chris can be asked to voice this. While I agree Chris’ impressions are good, there is no reason they couldn’t do a full cast reading too. I think if it’s new timeline. New continuity. Younger characters than the cast are. And by the sound of it a different tone and vibe, that any narration should be from a completely fresh narrator/performers. I think the trouble here is that it’s not just that we’re invested in the characters of RD, we’re invested in the actors’ performances of the characters of RD. We’re not just invested in the characters’ friendships, we’re invested in the actors’ friendships. You’d either be voicing them so differently that it’s not Red Dwarf, or you’d be voicing them so similarly that we’d be picking up on the handful of times they don’t sound like ‘them’. I think the books by being humourous without delivering constant ‘woofers’ inhabit an odd world where they’re – obviously – amazing to read – and also generally brilliant to listen to one person reading an audio of, but to have them performed as a full-cast drama – but without the laugh-a-minute style of the series – would seem really odd and probably very flat. Like Series VII but with less laughs, probably…
All this talk of who should narrate a hypothetical Titan audiobook, and nobody’s suggested the most experienced Red Dwarf audiobook narrator of them all?
I think if it’s new timeline. New continuity. Younger characters than the cast are. And by the sound of it a different tone and vibe, that any narration should be from a completely fresh narrator/performers. In full live action sure, but if we accept the actors sounding older in Big Finish I think we could here.
I think if it’s new timeline. New continuity. Younger characters than the cast are. I much prefer the Better Call Saul approach of not caring what age the actors are “supposed to be”. It’s all theatre.
I much prefer the Better Call Saul approach of not caring what age the actors are “supposed to be”. It’s all theatre. Hopefully we get a TV version with the current cast playing their 25-year-old selves.
Hopefully we get a TV version with the current cast playing their 25-year-old selves. Unironically yes. I think that’d be a fantastic challenge for them as actors, and it would also shine a spotlight on how much of their current performance style is a personal choice/evolution rather than them just “forgetting” how they used to do it.
Just digitally de-age them. It’d be like that scene in the Irishman where it’s clearly old Deniro wearing a CGI face of young Deniro.
For one-off characters I think it might be Camille. By the way, I bet there will be pleasure GELFs in this. I’m calling it!
Well ironically they probably wouldnt be playing themselves in the de-aging part. They would likely grab other actors to play those parts and then add the CGI face on top. And why? Because if you film infront of an audience that would be how it would have to be done and thats also generally how they do it in movies. Because sometimes the casts body size may have changed or if they have to play against themselves its just easier to have someone else play one half of that
Except that scene was recorded when the actors were 10 years younger than now (Feb 2016). So you’re saying the best de-aging practise is to record it in the past?
So you’re saying the best de-aging practise is to record it in the past? You won’t be laughing when Doug cobbles together an entire episode made out of deleted scenes from the bubble era.
Except that scene was recorded when the actors were 10 years younger than now (Feb 2016). We aren’t going to be free of “this XI / XII thing was happening a decade ago” for a while and it is going to damage me.
Well they couldn’t use Craig’s voice has his voice has deepened since Series 1. And Craig might be a little wider in body shape. So to get an accurate young Lister it would have to be stand in’s and AI.
It’s a pointless conversation anyway, because Red Dwarf is now just books (and that was touch and go) and month-long live residencies at the O2.
It’s a pointless conversation anyway, because Red Dwarf is now just books (and that was touch and go) and month-long live residencies at the O2. Let the original cast play the characters in their twenties in a prequel on TV, but use virtual avatars for the live show à la ABBA Voyage.
We aren’t going to be free of “this XI / XII thing was happening a decade ago” for a while and it is going to damage me. Well yes, it’ll eventually be two decades…
All this talk of who should narrate a hypothetical Titan audiobook, and nobody’s suggested the most experienced Red Dwarf audiobook narrator of them all? I had to reverse search that and now I feel dumb.
How Rushy wants it to work Why not? I think they’re good enough actors to convince that they’re playing their younger selves, even if they look nothing like it. Well they couldn’t use Craig’s voice has his voice has deepened since Series 1. Craig doesn’t have a smoker’s voice, so he can easily just pitch higher.
Why not? I think they’re good enough actors to convince that they’re playing their younger selves, even if they look nothing like it.
I can suspend my disbelief so long as the actors can capture the heart and soul of their younger selves.
I’m so old fashioned that I weep at a novel being called “Red Dwarf content.” It gives me flashbacks to Chris Barrie’s website. Which is never a good thing.
Craig doesn’t have a smoker’s voice, so he can easily just pitch higher. He kinda does though. He has a far more croaky and deeper voice these days. Not that it matters because lets remember AI can replicate voices now and so thats likely how they would do it. After all, if you have that ability now then why wouldn’t you use it? Talking of AI voices. Has anyone seen some of the Fan made attampts at Craig’s voice on Character AI?
I get the idea of suspending disbelief, it’s all theatre, etc. It’s no different to recasts in a way. I mean, I like Big Finish, and youngest classic Doctor Peter Davison probably sounds the oldest of them all now. The problem is, your average viewer doesn’t think like that. When classic Doctors have appeared in Doctor Who since it came back, there’s always been dialogue to handwave it away, because it’s so visibly obvious that it’s too much for a lot of people.
The problem is, your average viewer doesn’t think like that. When classic Doctors have appeared in Doctor Who since it came back, there’s always been dialogue to handwave it away, because it’s so visibly obvious that it’s too much for a lot of people. Is it really too much for people, or do you only feel that way because the show was insecure enough to make excuses for itself? If you write for an average viewer, you get an average audience. If you write for an intelligent viewer and let the rest catch up at their own pace…
I do feel like the staggering success of a show like Better Call Saul in spite of its excellent quality and refusal to simplify itself or indulge in too much fanwank proves that audiences aren’t as stupid as people think they are, it’s producers and showrunners who are afraid people won’t “get it”. Shows that I feel are dumbed down or catered to lower common denominators seem to be flashes in the proverbial pan oftentimes. I think if you just make something good people will enjoy it, actually. And if you have to have “these actors are older now but portraying younger versions of their characters” explained to you, maybe you should stick to something more your speed, like staring at a wall.
Not that it matters because lets remember AI can replicate voices now and so thats likely how they would do it. After all, if you have that ability now then why wouldn’t you use it?
Well, it’s all speculation I suppose, but I think having people in their 60s playing people in their 20s as a major part of a story would confuse / irritate a sizable portion of the audience. Whether the producers are ok with that response is up to them.
would confuse / irritate a sizable portion of the audience. Whether the producers are ok with that response is up to them. And so the saga continuums XD
Well they did it with Indiana Jones in last movie. de-aged Harrison Ford and just made him look young. While his body shape still worked for it, his voice did sound older which is probably why they didn’t have him so to much. But then Red Dwarf doesn’t have that type of money. So ethical atrocities be damned.
That seems rather simplistic in this instance. The “ethical atrocities” such as they are would be the use of someone’s performance without permission and that it deprives a human actor of a job (not that actors are entitled to every possible job, otherwise someone who performs multiple roles in the same production would be equally guilty of this), which wouldn’t apply if it was just being used to make an actor’s own performance sound like their younger selves. It does not do anyone any favours to act like AI is inherantly evil. That just weakens the geniuine critiques.
De-aged Indiana Jones was awful, and that’s as good as it gets. Not being subjected to de-aged Craig Charles on a Dave budget is a blessing. Even that Scorsese film, apparently from a visionary who should know better, is crap. It was crap in Rise of Skywalker. It will be crap in the next thing it’s crap in. Did anybody see that Superbowl ad with Ben Affleck, George Constanza and Carlton et al? It strangled what faith I had left in anything to a pathetic, empty death.
Well, it’s all speculation I suppose, but I think having people in their 60s playing people in their 20s as a major part of a story would confuse / irritate a sizable portion of the audience. Whether the producers are ok with that response is up to them. Including me; I don’t think I would be able to suspend my disbelief enough to enjoy anything of that nature.
Did anybody see that Superbowl ad with Ben Affleck, George Constanza and Carlton et al? It strangled what faith I had left in anything to a pathetic, empty death. Yes. It was fucking awful.
I get the idea of suspending disbelief, it’s all theatre, etc. It’s no different to recasts in a way. I mean, I like Big Finish, and youngest classic Doctor Peter Davison probably sounds the oldest of them all now. The problem is, your average viewer doesn’t think like that. When classic Doctors have appeared in Doctor Who since it came back, there’s always been dialogue to handwave it away, because it’s so visibly obvious that it’s too much for a lot of people. https://youtu.be/9WABczTXLGg?si=TEu03_oJHJlbIDBD I love this. 44 years on from his first appearance, and he’s still got it. This is the same gap as Hartnell coming back in 2007 aged 99 to battle the Master in Last of the Timelords. Troughton reappearing in 2010 aged 90 to battle the Master in The End of Time. Pertwee reappearing in 2015 aged 96 to battle the Missy in Magician’s Apprentice. Tom B reappearing in 2018 aged 84 to battle a frog on a chair. Deeper voice or not for Davison, the performance is still great. The hat helps!
…which wouldn’t apply if it was just being used to make an actor’s own performance sound like their younger selves.
De-aged Indiana Jones was awful, and that’s as good as it gets. Not being subjected to de-aged Craig Charles on a Dave budget is a blessing. Even that Scorsese film, apparently from a visionary who should know better, is crap. It was crap in Rise of Skywalker. It will be crap in the next thing it’s crap in. Did anybody see that Superbowl ad with Ben Affleck, George Constanza and Carlton et al? It strangled what faith I had left in anything to a pathetic, empty death. Oh I’d definitely prefer getting a younger actor for Doug’s proposal, especially since we’d also have older Lister in it already, but if it allowed an audio book to have extra versimilitude while retaining the original actor than go ahead and use a voice filter. I’d also just live with their current voice but whatever.
