Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 2,442 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Red Dwarf DVD commentary – a question #296688

    You can use MakeMKV through VLC, but the discs have to be part of a library of DRM codes, and it’s remarkable how few seem to be in them. I’m sure if you’re watching some big films it’s fine, but none of the Who ones I tried were recognised.

    I don’t even have a telly, nor anywhere to put one, so that’s not really an option either. It’s all a massive pain in the arse.

    in reply to: The Gallifrey Gals’ own thread #296659

    on first watch my girlfriend thought VI was awful…
    … and on second watch? Third watch? Tell me she’s changed her mind. Is that what you were going to say? Speak, Debris! How can we change her opinion?

    On second watch she still thought it was awful. I haven’t taken if further.

    Mind you I don’t really rate VI either, so I’m in no rush to forcibly correct her. It’s The Fast Show I’m planning on using when I make her sit and enjoy something she hates.

    in reply to: Jokes you don't/didn't get #296657

    He’s David, David, David rimmer.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf DVD commentary – a question #296656

    Get a Mac, they said. They’re better than PCs, they said. Course, then I started buying BluRays, only to realise that Apple don’t support them, meaning I currently have no way of watching loads of my Doctor Who extras. I can rip them, but each boxset comes to several hundred GB, meaning even with a bunch of external HDs, I don’t have room for all of them. I’ve taken to ripping a box, watching the whole thing, then deleting it, but that’s not very useful when I just feel like putting on a couple of Behind the Sofas or whatever. 

    in reply to: The Gallifrey Gals’ own thread #296625

    Yeah, a lot of the issues with VIII especially come from people who have an emotional investment in the show. Most of us can admit that even the worst Dwarf has a fair few good jokes, but it lacks the magic touch that makes us adore the programme. If you’re new to it, it’s not so hard to make the most of a bad episode and move on.

    (that said, on first watch my girlfriend thought VI was awful and VII unwatchable, so it also depends how picky the person is)

    in reply to: Red Dwarf DVD commentary – a question #296624

    And I think the kind of tech and approach that made albums like Thriller hasn’t moved on that much. Sure there’s production trends now but to compare Thriller to a 1942 jazz album…which is the same time difference…

    The problem with that is ‘pop’ as we think of it now didn’t really exist in 1942. Yes, vocal jazz was around, but it was almost a different medium. You might as well compare Taylor Swift’s latest album to a vocal jazz album from 1924 and point out they have way more in common than folk music and romantic compositions from 1824.

    When Thriller was released, styles like shoegaze, speed garage, IDM, nu-metal, hyperpop, footwork, dubstep, grime, big beat, emo and electro house – to name a few – would have sounded mind-bogglingly futuristic, and yet all of them provided high charting records in the UK.

    Also, while on the surface, there may be more similarity over time, there are other points to consider. It’s much more common these days for artists to use music to express outsider perspectives, to make music about queerness, mental health and feminism, for example, than it was in the 1980s. Artists like Charli XCX, Arca and Sophie would never have been given the opportunity to write and produce for mainstream pop musicians even in the 90s. While rock and indie have disappeared from the singles charts, they have been replaced by pop artists who write their own lyrics and music, choose their own producers, and decide how their records are marketed. While that was true of Michael Jackson, it was actually extremely rare for mainstream pop singers until the last ten or fifteen years.

    As things carry on, and more and more new ideas are used up, and technology becomes more broad, offering more options and thus defining each era less by its own limitations, there will naturally be fewer truly original things that come along, but honestly, I don’t see the 1990s, 2000s, 2010s or 2020s as especially less distinctive than the four decades that came before them when it comes to music. I’m always finding new and different things and have yet to reach a point where I’m not excited by new and different music coming out.

    Case in point: I remember around 2016/2017, putting on Lady Gaga’s ‘Let’s Dance’, and at that point it sounded to me like the most embarrassingly dated thing ever, much more than stuff from earlier decades. That electroclash-inspired pop of the late 00s is heavily indebted to its own time and doesn’t sound at all like anything that’s come along since. It’s as different to modern pop as Destiny’s Child were to Stock Aitkin & Waterman era Kylie.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf DVD commentary – a question #296623

    Anyway, even if everything was grey in the 80s, it’s still notable to me that people were interested in/idealised 1986 in 2002, in a way we wouldn’t now. Like maybe people miss emo and Shrek but there isn’t a generic 2000s “look” I can think of, in the way that neon makes the 80s, flares and naff wallpaper makes the 70s, GAP clothes and coffee shops make the American 90s, etc. 

    Nah, the trend for the past few years has been “y2k” and it’s very striking. I live by a school, and all the sixth formers look exactly like everyone did when I was in sixth form. Girls especially, in crop tops, cargo jeans, centre partings with highlights, it’s actually the most accurately pulled off retro style I’ve ever seen. Turn of the century music videos were all silvery futurism, heavily Matrix inspired, which I see a fair bit of online. Trance and UK garage are pretty big influences on modern pop, especially the slightly odder ends of it (hyperpop and the like). Looking online, there are a LOT of teenagers aping the nu-metal look with disturbing accuracy. And in the past year, there seems to have been a real revival in the whole scene/emo look, albeit with nu-metal style baggy jeans mixed in. Kids are calling it the “rawring 20s” (I hate it). There’s a LOT of false nostalgia for the early 2000s around in teenagers at the minute. I can’t really see it myself, but then people of every generation think that when their own era reappears.

    90s? The whole “grunge” fashion which was a huge thing throughout a lot of the 2010s, lots of references to grunge music but also the fashion, baggy check shirts, flared ripped jeans. 90s dance music has been heavily reappropriated over the past ten years, from piano house to rave and jungle. The one thing that’s not really been done is British mainstream imagery. Music videos and telly in the mid 90s were all about heavily oversaturated primary colours, there’s a really distinctive look, but it’s one of those things that’s not really been revived. Actually, that’s true of a ton of British 90s culture. Britpop doesn’t seem to have really had a particular comeback, a lot of electronic scenes like ambient house and big beat have been completely passed over, there was a very brief period when things like bucket hats and polo shirts popped their heads up but none of it really caught on. Generally it seems these days, nostalgia and revivals tends to come from US culture. 

    Despite being on the wrong end of my 30s, I still keep in touch with a lot of modern fashion and music and there have been very distinctive callbacks to the 90s and early 00s that have been enthusiastically adopted by younger generations. I think once we get past the nu-rave dayglo makeup and cassettes as necklaces era we’ve finally run out, though. I haven’t noticed any distinctive new fashions in the past 15 years, and musically we’ve only really had trap, footwork and hyperpop, two of which are still as prolific as ever. I can’t actually identify what could possibly be in a 2010s revival, given that it was the first decade that seemed to be almost entirely made of revivals. I suppose lo-fi house might make a comeback. Fuck knows.

    Actually, I think the next thing will be the death of any consensus in fashion. There are already teenagers out there wearing skinny jeans inspired by scene kids from 2005, despite incredibly baggy jeans being very much the fashion right now. Late ‘60s and early ‘70s stuff seems to still be very big with people in their mid 20s onwards, at odds with the y2k style of people only a few years younger. I think as we reach the point where there are no longer individual eras to ape, the mainstream will begin to splinter in the way more underground scenes have over the last 20 years. 

    in reply to: Red Dwarf DVD commentary – a question #296580

    Not gonna lie, I see people in converse all the time. All ages. 

    Fashion wise, the biggest difference is skinny jeans were still either hipster or emo clothes back in 2008, now they’re middle aged women clothes. 

    It was initially intended to be a play, which would explain it feeling theatrical.

    in reply to: The Gallifrey Gals’ own thread #296404

    At its best, Voyager is great, but so much of it feels very tired to me. Lots of stories that could have been done better in TNG, and a lot of non-entity characters. I wouldn’t want it to be as heavily serialised as DS9, but there are way too many ‘huge’ plots which get resolved quickly and forgotten about; instead, I’d love it if you had things like Tuvix being around for a few episodes as a standard crew member before that plot resolves; they tried it with Seska, and Paris’s demotion, but they felt very undercooked. TNG has them going on missions, so the structure makes sense, but Voyager’s journey home format makes the “then this happened then this happened then this happened” structure stand out awkwardly. 

    Yeah, they often start as mini-series of three or four weekly episodes, then over time tend to become one-offs. “Series 8” of Morse is spread over five years, a lot of Frost “series” are single episodes or two-parters. 

    Waking the Dead and Silent Witness ran as series, but always as runs of two part stories broadcast on consecutive days, a bit like Davison era Who. 

    You do get more conventionally structured ones, but they’re often the lighter kinds of show like Death in Paradise.

    I get the comparisons between Endeavour and Sherlock in some regards, but on the whole they had very different audiences: the former going for Morse fans and similar, Sherlock being a lot more quirky and aiming for a younger, Who-esque audience. 

    in reply to: The Gallifrey Gals’ own thread #296262

    I’m now reminded of the ‘young’ Picard and Riker in Star Trek: Picard and it’s making me feel weird.

    in reply to: The Gallifrey Gals’ own thread #296250

    Yeah, I mean it’s obvious that Doug is trying to go for ‘classic’ Lister or something, but he just misses the mark by quite a margin by turning him into a full on idiot. Lister always lacked knowledge, not understanding. 

    I remember the dot to dot puzzle being infuriating on first broadcast. At no point was Lister ever that stupid. His pride and excitement at finishing and realising it’s a bucket and spade still haunts me today.

    in reply to: The Gallifrey Gals’ own thread #296219

    My biggest problem with the gag is the same as all the VIII bunk room jokes: Lister is written as a Dougal-level idiot for some reason. Only a series ago he was comfortably explaining time paradoxes so complex they blew up cameras, and now he’s struggling to do a dot-to-dot.

    in reply to: The Gallifrey Gals’ own thread #296185

    Sci-fi uses “dimension” when it means “universe” all the time (Dimension Jump should be Universe Jump)

    The novels would disagree.

    in reply to: The Gallifrey Gals’ own thread #296181

    We’re conflating universes and dimensions again.

      

    in reply to: Mundane observation dome #296046

    Given how ludicrous  her prediction of Lister’s death is, I honestly question whether any of her prophecies was true, other than the one that Kryten Figured Out.

    in reply to: Mundane observation dome #296044

    Well also all the Canaries don’t die anyway, we see them again in the next episode. Unless they were all replacements, I don’t want to watch Cassandra again, despite it being probably the best of Series 8 (very low bar), to check. 

    The only one we explicitly see is Kill Crazy, and he’s shown to have spent the episode in the travel pod with a nasty red mark on his head.

    in reply to: Mundane observation dome #296038

    Or they were just rounded-up times and it was an easy way of saying everyone else will die in 58 minutes and 13 seconds time but Rimmer will die in 19 minutes 42 seconds time.

    in reply to: Who has has a Red Dwarf dream? #295963

    ‘The One Where Everyone’s Lister’

    in reply to: Chris Barrie has updated his website #295931

    Before his agent said “er, Chris, this isn’t doing your career, such as it is, any favours at all, how about just sticking to convention news now, eh?”

    in reply to: Starbug’s INVISIBILITY CLOAK #295716

    Now that’s how you headcanon.

    in reply to: Starbug’s INVISIBILITY CLOAK #295638

    When attacked by simulants, space corps enforcement vehicle and their future selves in VI for a start. 

    in reply to: The Gallifrey Gals’ own thread #295630

    Yes, I’ve ranted about Stardisbug many a time and will continue to do so. VII would have been much better if episode 1 was Use the Time Drive to Recover Red Dwarf and then things like Duct Soup would at least make sense. It would also have stopped VIII from happening the way it did.

    in reply to: Unanswered Questions #295530

    Penis destruction.

    Superb, Warbodog!

    in reply to: Bobby on YouTube #295112

    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?)

    in reply to: Mundane observation dome #295040

    I love the fact they found that location and instead of saying “let’s try somewhere without the local park fence in the background” they thought “yes, provincial small town England is the exact look we want for this futuristic alien theme park.”

    in reply to: Rimsy the Stupid? #295011

    Although thinking about it, Lister having to wait 20 seconds for the wellies to arrive is potentially funnier than it being immediate.

    in reply to: Rimsy the Stupid? #295010

    But the soup arrives immediately. It’s not a case of waiting for it to pour. Same as the bucket and wellies. They must have been waiting, prepared. And from what we can see, the soup comes from above where the nozzle was.

    I think it’s replicators but they have Rimmer and Lister doing pretend makework because they’re useless but they can’t fire them. But unlike Star Trek replicators, these are made from pre-existing patterns which are limited. Kind of like the old sci-fi cartoon pills you pour water on and turn into a full meal. So they have a thousand servings of soup available in each vending machine and when you order one it’s immediately beamed in. 

    I am definitely not just making this up on the spot to find away around a visual discrepancy and throwaway gag in the first two episodes. 

    Actually, I honestly think the Future Echoes scene is written intended to be at least vaguely like a replicator, a machine that can just provide anything you want immediately, but it gets it hilariously wrong. And then that idea is never useful for the plot again so is quietly dropped. 

    in reply to: Rimsy the Stupid? #294999

    Those early machines are weird anyway. Rimmer cleans the nozzle in the opening, but then when he orders chicken soup it arrives immediately on a mini dumb waiter style device. And they’re stocked with buckets and wellington boots. I still think it’s some kind of replicatory type thing. 

    in reply to: Rimsy the Stupid? #294980

    The vending machines in the first two series seem to work like replicators, which explains the food situation before Mel Bibby arrived on board and gave the ship a huge overhaul while the crew were asleep. Maybe they all work like that. 

    in reply to: Rimsy the Stupid? #294961

    I honestly always thought the pictures looked a little too much like Lister. After all the centuries of Chinese Whispers distorting things passed down by mouth there’s still some logic, but there’s no way over millions of years that any resemblance would remain. He should look a lot more like a cat, really, the way the west portrays the Middle Eastern Jesus as white.

    in reply to: Mundane observation dome #294960

    Does the mutton vindaloo beast not count as a guest character? Genuine question. 

    Also Bodyswap has the vending machine as a voiceover. 

    Blue does technically have some background extras in the flashback. 

    in reply to: Unanswered Questions #294902

    Sorry.

    in reply to: Unanswered Questions #294845

    How is Red Dwarf able to pass through stellar bodies without anybody feeling it or there being any damage? 

    I think they just missed them all.

    I suppose this could be referring to areas of space, but in my head it was always planets and stuff, probably because it does in Infinity. This is ignoring the nonsense of seeing stuff after you’ve passed it – by that point you’ll be so far away from the light waves that enabled you to see it you’re way past where that light wave even is, surely? 

    I thought Back to Earth WAS the resolution. I know she was mentioned in SX a few times, but…since they dropped that…she’s off doing her own stuff, like Ace..I thought it was left at that 

    Nah, given that the X idea was intended to actually bring her back, BtE was clearly planned as a reintroduction. 

    Personally I think if Doug knows he’s doing a last episode he’ll try and bring her back, allowing her and Lister to be together as they fly off into the distance at the end.

    in reply to: Unanswered Questions #294817

    Why are those specific moments future echoes? Surely if it’s to do with the speed of travel, they’d either see the future constantly or not at all, not just odd moments that are almost all notable moments in the characters’ futures? How is Red Dwarf able to pass through stellar bodies without anybody feeling it or there being any damage? 

    in reply to: Doctor Dwarf: The Books #294569

    Sneaky bit of self-promo here, but I’ve just started a YouTube series covering the Who novels and will absolutely be pointing out every Doctor Dwarf reference, in case anyone wants to watch:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4BXrlF376U&list=PLMKCgft0IdODP0yHXwppqbJw6P-Z9bQ4F&pp=gAQBiAQB

    in reply to: Mundane observation dome #294443

    Given what happens in Dimension Jump, RD has previous when it comes to alternate versions of characters seeking each other out over time.

    in reply to: Mundane observation dome #294424

    That’s surprising. I guess if they had actually properly exchanged information as alternate Kryten suggested, pertinent questions would have been “What did you do differently that meant you either didn’t lose Red Dwarf, or already found it?” and “If you didn’t lose Red Dwarf, why did you end up going into deep sleep for the same period of time as we did, and why did you end up going the same way we did, including (probably) a visit to Legion?”  

    Kryten handwaves it away in a deleted scene by saying “long story” about 18 times.

    in reply to: Mundane observation dome #294001

    They could do it like Bottom and just throw in loads of ludicrously over the top violence and knob gags to fill out the show. Would suit Marooned perfectly.

    in reply to: Almost XIII news #293865

    One of my more successful threads, this.

    It was always going to be another special or two, wasn’t it? Good to see it’s still looking positive. Had the GNP thing not happened this would probably be the third rather than the second, and I’m not convinced it won’t be the last – if another is commissioned, Bobby will be in his 70s! – but it’s all lovely stuff.

    in reply to: Mundane observation dome #293864

    It’s like a savoury pancake but worse.

    in reply to: The Worst of Red Dwarf Memes #293812

    in reply to: Smugle or Strugle? – Dispatches From Smegle #293810

    Spent most of that trying to work out who it was haha.

    in reply to: The Worst of Red Dwarf Memes #293753

    Go on then, here’s some more misery for you.

    in reply to: The Worst of Red Dwarf Memes #293752

    Set phasers to fun would be a much better name, wouldn’t it?

    in reply to: The Worst of Red Dwarf Memes #293745

    Data would also not use contractions and or describe three things as “the thing”.

    in reply to: The Worst of Red Dwarf Memes #293739

    But Rimmer is everywhere!

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 2,442 total)