Bobby on YouTube

[si]

Bobby’s currently doing doing a live Q&A thing on the YouTubes. He’s been doing it for about 50 minutes, so maybe I should have drawn peoples’ attention to it before now.
https://www.youtube.com/live/zuifa2qq9aM?si=pjGqsq_vYZCldx_P

His words on the possibility of new Dwarf?

“I am not at liberty to say. Which is such a giveaway. Cause I didn’t think we were meant to tell anyone – I don’t think we are – but Craig was telling everyone yesterday, so: it’s not impossible. It’s not confirmed, not confirmed, but it’s not impossible that we will be making a further Red Dwarf experience.”

Topic

[Dave]

[Quinn: Clochebusters World Champion]

 > Those are pretty darn similar concepts

they are doing very different things. And that’s the point people here are trying to distinguish.

[RunawayTrain]

As I understand it:

Rebooting/restarting a computer is usually because something has changed – most commonly after a software update.  Or because it’s lagging and the reboot shuts programmes down and clears temporary files or whatever.

Reviving would be akin to waking it up from sleeping/hibernation, or turning it on again after it’s been switched off for a while simply because it wasn’t being used.

Two different purposes, two different meanings – originally, anyway.

Although to be fair I don’t know whether there was any difference when you had to put in a disk to be able to boot up the computer, which would be the *original* original meaning, but I’m not sure those terms were used metaphorically until the computing usage became as above.

[Flap Jack]

Right, usually you would only say you’re rebooting a PC when you’re switching it off but switching it back on immediately. There aren’t many TV series that feels analogous to. Maybe shows that were cancelled by their original network but then very quickly picked by another one? I don’t think many people would describe e.g. Brooklyn Nine-Nine Seasons 6-8 as a revival to be honest, let alone a reboot.

That’s why what the words have come to mean via popular usage is most important… but then of course we just end up disagreeing about whether or not said usage is actually popular enough to be recognised as a correct definition.

[Moonlight]

My argument is that calling every time something comes back a “reboot” means I need to ask follow-up questions about what exactly that means that could be answered by the word we use to describe the thing itself.

[Quinn: Clochebusters World Champion]

My argument is that calling every time something comes back a “reboot” means I need to ask follow-up questions about what exactly that means that could be answered by the word we use to describe the thing itself.

Yeah this. Something is lost by reducing the language down from 2 good descriptive words to one single word that could mean either thing. 

I’m generally in the camp of “language changes and evolves” and accept that reboot is used to mean revival. But it isn’t helpful and at the very least blogs and news outlets could help by using the distinctions 

[Flap Jack]

Yeah, I get that for sure.

For what it’s worth, I’m sorry for derailing the thread like this. I could have just let “well, reboot seems like a correct word to me” remain in my head, or just said it once and left it, but internet forums create a compulsion… at the very least I could have derailed it with something more fun than semantic argument.

Last year someone made a post on the Last of Us subreddit, that was a picture of Ellie as made in the Hogwarts Legacy character creator, and just by pointing out the obvious irony of it, I turned the comments section into a nuclear disaster area in under a couple of hours. This was, in my unbiased opinion, a rare and precious example of Virtuous Thread Derailment. But “there’s no virtuous thread derailment on the Ganymede & Titan forums”, as my great great grandmother used to say.

[Moonlight]

For what it’s worth, I’m sorry for derailing the thread like this.

You say that as if it totally wasn’t me.

[Flap Jack]

Well you made the initial comment, but it was me that turned it into an actual argument. Let’s call it a team effort.

[Quinn: Clochebusters World Champion]

[Ian Symes]

Should be “pedants on both sides”, surely?

[Formica]

Should be “pedants on both sides”, surely?

Well, are we referencing the tactics or the participants?

[Warbodog]

I think Quinn should have used a semicolon.

[Future Producer of Series IX – aaaaany day now]

23 years and 109 days later and Douglas Adams’ prophesied massacre of the pedants has still yet to take effect. What’s taking them so long?

[Jenuall]

“Oh wow, lots of posts in the Bobby on YouTube thread. I wonder what cool stuff Bobby has been saying about the show to generate this much discussion, must be good! …”

[Dave]

Should be “pedants on both sides”, surely?

Pedantics semantics.

[Moonlight]

♫ Pedantic / -dantic / oh, so frantic! ♫

[si]

Oop, he’s doing another one in ten minutes. You can’t keep him away now, can you?

https://t.co/egStDXml11

[Unrumble]

Oop, he’s doing another one in ten minutes. You can’t keep him away now, can you? 

[Stephen Abootman]

5.55 for another BobCast 

[Stephen Abootman]

Update: “We’ve all agreed to do more, we’re not going to make a whole new series but we’re making…something, and it should be fun. And we’re hopefully… hopefully we’ll make it later this year, if not it’ll be early next year.”

[Moonlight]

Somebody tell me if he says anything about Red Dwarf on this livestream, I got pulled away from it.

[Quinn: Clochebusters World Champion]

Everyone shush. Don’t tell Moonlight

[barbucha]

Bobby talks about electric cars and the planned return of Red Dwarf. Filming should take place at the turn of 2024/2025!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJgCXUWq5_w

Full stream on his Youtube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUtsAWDSUTM&t=0s

[International Debris]

Can’t believe I missed a discussion about the word reboot. Can we revive it so I can join in?

(You certainly wouldn’t replace revive with reboot there, would you?)

[Podey]

So, according to Bobby, it’s 3 x half hour episodes telling one story rather than a feature-length special. Thoughts?

https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/sci-fi/red-dwarf-three-new-episodes-newsupdate/

[Warbodog]

So, according to Bobby, it’s 3 x half hour episodes telling one story rather than a feature-length special. Thoughts?

I can’t help but compare to how Back in the Red and Back to Earth turned out vs The Promised Land and feel disappointed by the idea, but just have to find out. Then again, 3 recording dates rather than 2 would mean more lucky people can go.

[Formica]

[Podey]

God that Kryten mask really is terrible. 

It was spot on for Back To Earth, I don’t know how they managed to forget how to make it in the years between.

[Flap Jack]

My first thought is that the circumstances for this being 3 parts are very different to the circumstances for Backs in the Red and to Earth, so it’s probably not a huge cause for concern. If done well it could be the happy medium between The Promised Land and Confidence & Paranoia / Me². 3 distinct episodes but with a prominent throughline.

My second thought is “Yes! At least 3 more entries in the Ruby Reckoning!”

My third thought is “… cliffhangers and the anticipation between the episodes could be fun?”

[Jenuall]

[Formica]

Perhaps I should make myself clearer.

[clem]

“… cliffhangers and the anticipation between the episodes could be fun?”

Yeah it sounds like maybe they’re aiming for a bit of “event telly” with the three-part broadcast, perhaps on three consecutive evenings just like BTE, but the feature-length version will be intended as the definitive one. Fair enough I suppose. 

[Dave]

My second thought is “Yes! At least 3 more entries in the Ruby Reckoning!”

Mine was: a Smegle that I might actually stand a chance of guessing. 

[Dax101]

A 3 part special gives me Back To Earth flashbacks. Also 30 minutes less than TPM.

[Formica]

TPM

The Promised Mand

[Moonlight]

30×3=90 so I’m not sure how that’s half an hour less than 90 minutes. Unless you’re misremembering the two hour runtime with commercials as the actual special’s runtime.

[Dax101]

The Promise Land was marketed as a 2 hour special. How long were the ad breaks?


Edit: looking at the runtime of the DVD it does say just under 90 minutes so you are right.

[Flap Jack]

Even though it’s ambiguous, Dave have made 3 full series with proper half hour episodes by now. I don’t see any reason why they’d go back to “30 minutes with adverts”.

[Podey]

I see no indication that they won’t be proper half hour episodes, assuming you’re implying that it will be a half hour slot with 5 minutes lost for ad breaks? 

[Dave]

I think it may be a bit early to be discussing the specific timings of a format that even Bobby doesn’t seem to be sure about at this point.

Personally, I’d love another 90-minute special – that would feel like more of an ‘event’ than a new series – but we’ll see.

[Flap Jack]

I’d like another 90 minute special, but only after they’ve done Series XIII, Series XIV and Series XV, all with 6 episodes each.

I think that’s a fair enough request.

Also bring back Holly (Hayridge version) as a regular and Snacky as recurring, ya bastards.

[Dave]

I’m hoping the origins of Snacky will be the main story thread in Red Dwarf: Titan.

[Ian Symes]

I am so fucked off with all the gun jumping. Robert’s exact words:

“Three… well, a 90-minute special. Three half hours.”

That has somehow spiralled into OFFICIAL CONFIRMATION that the next Red Dwarf will be a three part mini-series. It could just as easily be interpreted as Robert saying it’ll be the equivalent of three regular episodes. He explicitly calls it “a 90-minute special”.

I am desperate to write an article ranting about all this, but it might have to wait til the weekend.

[Moonlight]

I still think it’s a 90 minute special, I was just entertaining the idea of a three parter in the other thread.

[Ian Symes]

Also, the VOD of Robert’s live stream has now been taken down. So someone’s had a word, at last.

[Ian Symes]

I still think it’s a 90 minute special, I was just entertaining the idea of a three parter.

Oh yeah, to clarify I’m not pissed off with any of you lot, I’m pissed off with people who are supposed to be professional journalists passing around unverified, unchecked third hand information and reporting it as fact, which leads ordinary people – quite reasonably – to react to rumours and conjecture as if it’s truth.

[Dave]

I think we should see what outrageous unverified rumours we can get into the next Radio Times clickbait article. Maybe something Jimmy Nail-based.

[Stephen Abootman]

Also, the VOD of Robert’s live stream has now been taken down. So someone’s had a word, at last.

Possibly not connected but did make me think of this line:

[Stephen Abootman]

I’m pissed off with people who are supposed to be professional journalists passing around unverified, unchecked third hand information and reporting it as fact, which leads ordinary people – quite reasonably – to react to rumours and conjecture as if it’s truth.

I think you’re mistaken. Look, it’s been confirmed by the good folk of filmstories.co.uk

[Author]

Replies