Alternate Episode Titles

[Pete Part Three]

Somewhere near the middle of my list of things I hate about Series VIII (yeah, deal with it), is the fact there’s only 5 titles for 8 episodes.

And the 5 episode titles are all pretty ropey. Certainly not to the standard of, say, Terraform, Thanks for the Memory or Out of Time. There’s no real reason that every part of the opening “trilogy” has to be called Back in the Red, and the working titles (Captain’s Office, Mirror\rorriM etc) were certainly more interesting.

(On a similar note, Natural Born Rimmers is a much better title than Stoke me a Clipper…)

Thoughts?

And while you’re typing “No, not really”, I’m going to try and think of some alternatives.

Topic

[Zombie Jim Undead]

Actually that’s quite a fun game…give an episode a name based on an utterly insignificant event / prop / character therein and see if you can guess it.

My go!

“Boiled Sweet”

[James]

Nanarchy

[Pete Part Three]

>but what started as a light-hearted chat about alternate titles turned into blah VIII titles crap syndrome again.

I did start the thread by saying that I found VIII titles to be “ropey” and this was kind of the point of suggesting alternates. Sorry, if you’ve been lulled here under false pretences.

I watched Can’t Smeg, Won’t Smeg the other day for the first time in years. Found it hideously embarassing. I was going to start a thread about it. I’d better not now.

>Woh, hold on their, spanky – Buffy did a bit of both. What?s My Line?, Becoming and Graduation Day were all two-parters.

Sorry, pickle. Bit of a oversight on my part. I didn’t get any further than Welcome to the Hellmout/Harvest and stupidly didn’t give it a further thought.

>You hear a lot of fans who?d prefer Who to be done the old way (myself included, given that the two-parters are so distinct).

Personal preference but I like the separate titles. The Stolen Earth / Journey’s End give a nice summary of the main focus of each episode.

With Back in the Red, it’s almost half the entire series so it just gets pretty old.

>And you were partially wrong about the X-Files, too.

Well, duh.

[Zombie Jim Undead]

Haha. Stealth bit of editing there. Yes…it was Nanarchy. Alternative titles for which include “motorised tie rack” and “pencil”.

[Zombie Jim Undead]

> I watched Can?t Smeg, Won?t Smeg the other day for the first time in years. Found it hideously embarassing. I was going to start a thread about it. I?d better not now.

Oh god yeah…that was feeble.

Also prefer the single Doctor Who titles (though I didn’t like them at first).

Makes sense that calling it “Last of the Time Lords Part 3” would put off casual viewers who hadn’t seen parts 1 and 2.

Plus with the story arcs you’d be hard pressed to break things up… is The Sound of Drums Utopia Part 2 or Last of the Timelords Part 1?

[James]

>I watched Can?t Smeg, Won?t Smeg the other day for the first time in years. Found it hideously embarassing. I was going to start a thread about it. I?d better not now.

Please do. I find the rice part very funny, but not why they had to explain it on screen.

[Zombie Jim Undead]

“Saxophone”. Anyone?

[locusceruleus]

>I watched Can?t Smeg, Won?t Smeg the other day for the first time in years. Found it hideously embarassing. I was going to start a thread about it. I?d better not now.

I didn’t think it was bad at all, for what it was – a daft throwaway thing for Red Dwarf Night.

[Pete Part Three]

The only bit that made me smile was when Robert hit Craig on the head with the yoghurt pot.

I’d be interested in seeing the script for this as it seems mostly improvised.

[Zombie Jim Undead]

I remember thinking at the time that the whole thing seemed like “coach party / package holiday humour”.

Not sure how to better explain it…but the Paul O’ Grady Show and most things with Des O’ Connor are steeped in it.

[James]

Paul Alexander wrote some of it with Doug, and which Series did Paul write for?

[Pete Part Three]

That’s not allowed either, huh?

[Zombie Jim Undead]

> Paul Alexander wrote some of it with Doug, and which Series did Paul write for?

My Hero and Miami 7…

[James]

>That?s not allowed either, huh?

Aw go on, you know you want to. I don’t mind well explained concise literature on the failings of something you don’t like.

[Andrew]

> ?Saxophone?. Anyone?

Backwards.

[Zombie Jim Undead]

Impressive. Most impressive.

It’s actually surprisingly difficult to come up with something obscure enough…

[Pete Part Three]

Ok, gotcha. We can’t discuss any perceived Red Dwarf missteps for fear of upsetting people. This list includes, but is not limited to:

* Red Dwarf VII
* Red Dwarf VIII
* Can’t Smeg, Won’t Smeg
* The Red Dwarf Survival Guide
* Red Dwarf Remastered

Perhaps we should also draw a line under any threads that discuss Red Dwarf’s numerous merits. After all, if you’re not going to take the complaints, the compliments must be similarly meaningless.

>My Hero and Miami 7?

I’d forgotten this.

[Pete Part Three]

Daz

[Zombie Jim Undead]

* Red Dwarf: The Log No. 1996
* Tonguetied The Single
* Red Dwarf USA….

[Pete Part Three]

>* Red Dwarf USA?.

Shit, I thought this was allowed. It’s so hard to keep up!

[Zombie Jim Undead]

> Daz

Stasis Leak!

“Apple”

[genericnerdyusername]

Tikka to Ride: Groundhog Day 2

[Pete Part Three]

See, I’m going to stand up for Tikka to Ride and say that it’s definitely not a rip-off of Groundhog Day.

[genericnerdyusername]

It so is, right down to the groundhog and Bill Murray cameo. Although it has been a while since I saw it so I may be talking out my arse here.

[Pete Part Three]

Ah, yeah. That cameo was pretty “blink and miss it”. No wonder I forgot. What was the groundhog doing to Jackie Kennedy in the back of the car though? I never got that bit.

[Pete Part Three]

>”Apple”

That wasn’t an apple, it was the Bolivian Navy on manoeuvres in the South Pacific.

[James]

>Ok, gotcha. We can?t discuss any perceived Red Dwarf missteps for fear of upsetting people. This list includes, but is not limited to:

* Red Dwarf VII
* Red Dwarf VIII
* Can?t Smeg, Won?t Smeg
* The Red Dwarf Survival Guide
* Red Dwarf Remastered

Perhaps we should also draw a line under any threads that discuss Red Dwarf?s numerous merits. After all, if you?re not going to take the complaints, the compliments must be similarly meaningless.

Change your name to Pete Part Pedantic. Immediately!

[pfm]

This is what happens when half the posts in a thread are by Jim and Pete.

[John Hoare]

If I can just step in here with my ADMIN BOOTS for a moment, I don’t think anything in this thread has gone anywhere near the bounds of… erm, wrongability, with regarding VII/VIII. As much as anything else, the whole thread started with a specific criticism of the series, rather than generic bashing for the sake of it (which admittedly can get timesome).

And, y’know, I quite like Can’t Smeg Won’t Smeg! May start a thread myself…

[James]

I didn’t know admin boots had padlocks and 5 inch heels John?

Seriously though, I wasn’t having a go at anyone, not even Pete, I see he’s got a fine sence of humor, I like that. Maybe I was a bit quick to reply with defending, but it can seem it’s quite a constant thing to debate VII & VIII, and when it gets down to the very title of the show, you know it gets a bit much, but as Pete already said it’s his prerogative, and that’s fine by me. A well constructed criticism is great, and finding new ways to do it. I just think there are far more good points to debate, but it’s harder to do so.

I think the cooking show could throw-up some fine debate…Maybe

[Phil]

Red Dwarf was so revolutionary, Samuel Beckett was referencing it before it even existed.

Bah. I should have typed “waiting for God” rather than Waiting for God, so that it’d be a phrase rather than a Red Dwarf title. Or the title of a different comedy show that nobody else seems to agree is shit.

So? yes? Or was that a no? I?m so confused I can?t even find my trousers with my legs.

IF it’s a reference to Godot, then yeah, it’s a pun. (I honestly don’t know if it is or not…but it’s certainly possible.) But since Godot itself (as a name) was a pun on God it’s kind of a strange situation…Dwarf’s “pun” version reads the same as Beckett’s would if unpunned.

[Pete Part Three]

This is long and rambling, but I thought it was worth saying as it’s been brewing for a while.

I admit my anger fuelled rages about VII and VIII are getting a little bit worrying (it’s been ten years; I need to let go!) but it’s hard when you love something and have it turn into what you consider to be a big pile of wank. (And I think the vast majority of missteps have all happened post 1993, barring Red Dwarf USA).

I’m seriously not spoiling for a rumble when I say that, it’s just how I feel. It’s Tim Bisley/Phantom Menace levels of disappointment and frustration.

When I first voiced my disapproval of VII in BTL’s review section back in the day, I was shouted down by various people in the following issue. To be honest, it kind of turned me off the whole notion of Red Dwarf fandom for a few years. I’m sure a lot of fans genuinely liked the direction(s) the show was taking, but I’m also sure that there were a lot of people watching it and trying to kid themselves that this was the same show (and whatever your feeling on its quality, you can at least see that it’s a very different show).

I think I stumbled onto G+T and White Hole (RIP) about 5 years ago and was rather impressed with the fact that, while genuinely enthusiastic about the subject, Ian, John and Cappsy (et al later on) weren’t adverse to taking the piss out of aspects that they felt didn’t work. It was where I wanted to go with it too.

I’ve strayed onto the official web-board a few times, but never felt like signing up simply because I think I’ll be shouted down for saying I don’t like any of the Red Dwarf output for the last 15 years. If I genuinely wanted to annoy people with VII and VIII diatribes, I’d be on there now. It used to be the reverse of here but I guess G+T’s readership has widened significantly (which is GREAT).

I don’t begrudge people for saying they like them (and there are quite a few pro VII and VIII people on G+T these days). I WISH I liked them too. I don’t hate them for the fun of it (in fact, I don’t hate Tikka to Ride or Stoke me a Clipper at all). I’m genuinely not here just to start trouble, it’s just that voicing these opinions on G+T didn’t use to kick-start wars quite so often.

VII and VIII bashing happens because a few like-minded fans believe almost 1/3 of Red Dwarf isn’t up to its previous best. It’s genuinely extremely hard to discuss these episodes in any depth without your opinion on them leaking through. So, if the option is bashing 1/3 of the episodes, or not mentioning them ever again…I’m going to side with the former.

And that’s kind of what happened to this thread. The title of an episode doesn’t affect your enjoyment of it one iota, so I thought it would be a light-hearted thing to discuss. It’s genuinely irrelevant that it’s VIII’s titles that I find bad. It’s just an unfortunate addition to that list of mine.

[pfm]

> but I?m also sure that there were a lot of people watching it and trying to kid themselves that this was the same show (and whatever your feeling on its quality, you can at least see that it?s a very different show).

That’s the thing, it was MEANT to be a different show. Essentially the stepping stone between Dwarf as a sitcom and the film. Even though Dwarf changed dramatically each series from 1-VI it remained a traditional multi-camera, studio audience sitcom. With VII the core rules were changed and therefore it couldn’t possibly match up to what had come before it, whether the writing was up to the same level or not. The easiest thing to do is imagine VI done in the format and style of VII, 8 episodes and all. It would have been just as ill-received IMO. I’m probably wrong, I know, but it feels right to say that.

I’m not the biggest fan of VI (Gunmen aside) for similar reasons people often give when bashing VII. The gags are sometimes crap and forced, however in VI they get away with it because it’s in front of an audience and the performances are more sitcom-y. I have officially stopped slagging off VIII. If you watch the one-episode version of BITR and forget about Pete it’s not a bad series at all, so stick that in your arse and…fart it! VII’s the dodgy one, but again if you only watch 6 of them (get rid of Ouroboros, even if it does introduce, or re-introduce, Kochanski, and also the pile of waste Nanarchy, Epideme doesn’t need a second part FFS, it’s a better viewing experience.)

Btw The Phantom Menace is a lot more appealing now, nearly ten years on, due to all the shit we’ve had to endure since then (not just AOTC and ROTS, I mean all the shit movies that have gone the CG-over-substance route). It’s hands down the best prequel. For a start, it was shot on film, unlike AOTC and ROTS shot on digital, which IMO immediately gives them more of an ‘artificial’ look. LONG LIVE film I say.

Though that’s just a wanky detail that most people couldn’t give a fuck about. It felt more like a Star Wars film than the other two. Liam Neeson put in at least some form of a performance, and there were thankfully not many lines for Obi-Wan so we didn’t have to hear Ewan McGregor’s stupid voice much. Darth Maul was better than anything in AOTC and ROTS. The saber fights in those were shit in comparison (so much hype over the Anakin/Obi-Wan duel in ROTS and it was WEAK. Anakin’s turn to Vader was WEAK. These should have been iconic moments, instead Lucas was obviously more bothered about lava effects and floating platforms, not to mention making sure Ian McDiarmid, Samuel L Jackson and Hayden Christensen gave performances I would find unacceptable in an am-dram production “No…nno…no…YOU will die!”) Bah. Who gives a fuck? Bring on the complete re-mastered saga ultimate Blu-ray set!!!

[locusceruleus]

I always think, at least series 7 and 8 (fuck roman numerals, its the 21st century) failed in their ways by trying to be different. In other words, the comedy-drama slant of series 7, and the knockabout full-crew trad. sitcom style of series 8. Surely this is better than going back, bucket in hand to the same well that was totally tapped dry in series 6. I really do appreciate that these were brave decisions on Doug’s part, even if they were somewhat less than successful.

(Just to reiterate, I love series 7, hate series 8. But there ya go.)

[Pete Part Three]

>That?s the thing, it was MEANT to be a different show.

Fair enough. It’s just that no one really seemed to pick up on that. It was business as usual, minus Rimmer. And, to be honest, I don’t think Doug was consciously going for a lower gag-ratio than, say, Series V.

>With VII the core rules were changed

These were decisions that were made. The fact that they went back for VIII, was an acknowledgement that they were the wrong ones. And, to be honest, my problems with VII have absolutely nothing to do with the filming style. Hence my extreme hatred for VIII.

>The easiest thing to do is imagine VI done in the format and style of VII, 8 episodes and all. It would have been just as ill-received IMO.

With the same scripts? I really don’t think so. Gunmen would have looked superb (just like Tikka looks superb).

>If you watch the one-episode version of BITR and forget about Pete it?s not a bad series at all, so stick that in your arse and?fart it!

You’ve just erased 3 episodes. Almost half the series. And why should you make “allowances” for a series to entertain you? I don’t have to with the others.

>Btw The Phantom Menace is a lot more appealing now, nearly ten years on,

I tried to watch it recently and fell asleep. It’s fucking awful. I’d agree with the film comment (nothing in III looks tangible), but it’s just so damn slow and BORING. II is a minor improvement, III is quite a bit better.

[Zombie Jim Undead]

What amazes me is that there are so many here who enjoy 7 and 8. Not saying it’s a bad thing…I just haven’t seen much support for them before.

Over the years I’ve watched a heck of a lot of Dwarf with a heck of a lot of different people – from those with a vague awareness of the show to an obsessional love…and only one of them actually enjoyed series 7 and 8.

Many people seem to like Cassandra…but other than that they seemed stunned by the drop in the quality of writing between 6 and 7.

For me, Pete sums it up perfectly – it’s a Tim Bisley / Phantom Menace feeling. And I’m not going to apologise for it any more than you should apologise if you love them.

[Andrew]

> >If you watch the one-episode version of BITR and forget about Pete it?s not a bad series at all, so stick that in your arse and?fart it!

> You?ve just erased 3 episodes.

TWO episodes – the ‘one episode’ version of BITR still uses the material from parts one, two and three.

> And why should you make ?allowances? for a series to entertain you?

IMO people do it all the time. You ignore the walls that wobble in Fawlty Towers (or The League of Gentlemen). You ignore the crappy rubber snake. You ignore continuity mistakes and the occasional bad edit. If you’re mostly entertained by a show, if you’re endeared by it, if you basically like it, you do let things go. How much you choose to allow is up to the individual – why SHOULDN’T you make allowances?

[Zombie Jim Undead]

> IMO people do it all the time. You ignore the walls that wobble in Fawlty Towers (or The League of Gentlemen). You ignore the crappy rubber snake. You ignore continuity mistakes and the occasional bad edit.

They’re mainly minor technical / aesthetic problems, though. Enjoying something despite what you perceive to be bad writing (which in a comedy is surely the heart…the core of what you enjoy about it) is rather different.

[TheLeen]

If all threads eventually degenerate into a series VIII dislike discussion, I may have to create a “Leave Series VIII Alone” youtube video. And it will not be pretty.

[Pete Part Three]

>TWO episodes – the ?one episode? version of BITR still uses the material from parts one, two and three.

Apologies. I’ve only watched it once and couldn’t remember how long it was.

>They?re mainly minor technical / aesthetic problems, though. Enjoying something despite what you perceive to be bad writing (which in a comedy is surely the heart?the core of what you enjoy about it) is rather different.

This. I’d forgive the crappy CGI in the Blue Midget dance (and probably find it endearing like the fake snake), if there was any worth to it other than being an unfunny “pastiche” (!) of the MIB music video.

>If all threads eventually degenerate into a series VIII dislike discussion, I may have to create a ?Leave Series VIII Alone? youtube video.

Now I think we’d all agree that this would be funny.

[Zombie Jim Undead]

Ha! It has to be done!

[Andrew]

> They?re mainly minor technical / aesthetic problems, though. Enjoying something despite what you perceive to be bad writing (which in a comedy is surely the heart?the core of what you enjoy about it) is rather different.

But PM’s point was only that he liked the series aside from a couple of eps. Not that he perceived the writing to be ‘bad’. I wasn’t suggesting anyone make allowances for the writing (though that’s hardly an either/or issue – you forgive “Have you done my leg yet?” or “What’s an iguana?”), but if they’re generally entertained BY that writing, why shouldn’t they make ‘ah well, you had a couple of duff eps there’ allowances?

[Zombie Jim Undead]

> (though that?s hardly an either/or issue – you forgive ?Have you done my leg yet?? or ?What?s an iguana??)

Absolutely not…though they are isolated duff notes within a sea of excellence. I see the ratio in series 7 and 8 as the exact opposite.

[Zombie Jim Undead]

Also, I should imagine that Pete (as myself) would take primary issue with the writing in Series 7 and 8..and that there’s not enough good to outweigh the bad and to make it an enjoyable experience overall.

If you can find enough to enjoy outside Pete Part 2 and Back in the Red Part 3, then that’s fair enough.

[Phil]

>(though that?s hardly an either/or issue – you forgive ?Have you done my leg yet?? or ?What?s an iguana??)

I don’t think anyone forgives “What’s an iguana?” Apart from Cappsy. Who is ALWAYS WRONG.

[ChrisM]

What IS an iguana?

I’m joking… I’m joking.

This is the first time I’ve found out people dislike that gag though. Sure it’s silly but I thought it fitted the ignorance of Lister well.

(And I confess I smiled at the ‘boring articles’ leg gag.)

[Tanya Jones]

I’ve never had a problem with the iguana gag. Just for the record.

[pfm]

I suppose the gag isn’t THAT bad, it’s just a mistake to make Lister look that stupid, and with the way it’s performed it deserves the silence it gets from the audience. If it had been in later series it would have got a laugh.

[Andrew]

It’s maybe a bad example, because it’s a line I like – Lister should be reacting to the insult, but instead he inadvertently proves Rimmer’s point; it at least has LEVELS. But it’s taken so much flack it seemed a safe enough example…as Phil has testified!

[Phil]

>But it?s taken so much flack it seemed a safe enough example?as Phil has testified!

It was definitely a safe example. :-) It’s one of the most annoying lines in the show to me, but I can live with it. I just love how often it pops up on G+T. It’s taken on a life of its own…most people either laugh at it or don’t and move on with their lives.

NOT US.

>If it had been in later series it would have got a laugh.

This is true. Now cue all those anti-series VIII arguments in which people say that audience laughter doesn’t mean the joke was good.

[Author]

Replies