Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 replies - 3,401 through 3,450 (of 3,509 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • in reply to: Red Dwarf: The Movie #216760
    Moonlight
    Participant

    It feels a lot bigger too, somehow. The 24-foot Series XI bigature doesn’t even look as big as it does. I wish there was a model of it. An 8-foot prebuilt would be nice.

    Free motion-control rig included.

    in reply to: Amazon US is Terrible at Red Dwarf ]]> #216759
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I’ve seen pages, Wikipedia included, that always make sure to spell it out as “Red Dwarf X” in full every time despite numbering other series as just “Series Roman Numeral” as you would expect. They actually think the series is titled Red Dwarf X as in the letter X, and that is without a doubt the worst fucking title possible. Does BtE not being called Series IX just throw a wrench into the works and confuse everyone?

    I have another questions: do people actually know Roman numerals? Because if not that would explain everything.

    in reply to: Amazon US is Terrible at Red Dwarf ]]> #216748
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I’ve also been fixing up some of the Red Dwarf Wikipedia articles due to errors like Series X being claimed to have used the “Series 8 shooting model” of Red Dwarf. The only thing people will notice I’ve done is the main article now features the XI logo, but none of the 8000 tiny things. I’m obsessive. Long story short, the most bizarre thing I’ve seen by far was the following sitting in the Production section of Demons & Angels’ article:

    “This episode features the last shot of the inside of Red Dwarf until Season 8. The irony is that the ship blows up and reappears at the end, only to not be shown again until Season 8.”

    An actual question is why didn’t he just post a topic about it on TOS in the wrong subforum like a normal person?

    I also have a hypothesis, but it’s filthy.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf: The Movie #216741
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I am going to set myself on fire now.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf: The Movie #216740
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Duh, the movie came out in 2003. Don’t you remember the tie-in Corgi models?

    I’m so glad the movie didn’t happen. A fucking reboot with Kochanski as a main character, the full crew, the pencil ship and no ten year gap for Doug to realise how bad VIII was.</quote>
    While I agree very much, I could live with the pencil ship if the model shots all looked as nice as the test fly-by they did. Minus of course that stupid astronaut floating in the way, I know it’s supposed to give a sense of scale but it doesn’t.

    *snorts* good one mr KyoSo sir

    Ma’am I can assure you, but I don’t mind because I also assume everyone online is male.

    in reply to: Should they have continued Red Dwarf after Series VI? #216696
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Backwards better than Last Human?

    Nah.

    No.

    No, no, nope. Last Human was a much better novel. I enjoyed Backwards, but I didn’t get invested in its story the way I did with Last Human. Plus, it also provided the closest thing we’ll ever get to a true ending to Red Dwarf. The stuff with Rimmer’s damaged light bee felt like a great send off to his character.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf: The Movie #216695
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Let’s ask the BBC, they’re certainly still interested in the kind of audience Red Dwarf used to attract.

    in reply to: Where's Samsara? #216575
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Please tell me we get Give & Take today. I’ve been looking forward to this for ages.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf XI Blu Ray/DVD #216374
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Sorry for the double post, but the edit button doesn’t fucking do anything.

    Interesting, the American DVD is listed as being released November 8th. That’d be awesome, but there’s no way in hell.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf XI Blu Ray/DVD #216373
    Moonlight
    Participant

    That temp DVD artwork still looks way better than the real one for Series X.

    in reply to: Who is Responsible for This Laugh? #216372
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Oh yeah, I remember being really confused by that since laughter sounds just about the same backwards and forwards. I figured maybe it was supposed to be “backwards” laughter?

    I tend to remember stuff like the topic’s “Ha-HAHA-haha” better because it’s just repeated. I can live with one stupid laugh, but I want to punch whoever thought “Ha-HAHA-haha” should be used seventy times an episode in the goddamn throat.

    in reply to: What if Rob and Doug never split up? #216371
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Judging from how Series VI was relying increasingly on weak running gags like the Space Corps Directives and Cat’s “Deader thans”, I bet you in the alternate universe where they didn’t split up, Series VIII is also regarded as very comedically lacking.

    But I don’t think the storytelling would have ever taken such a massive nosedive as it did between VII and VIII. We’d have none of that “HEY, WE NEED A CURE FOR THIS VIRUS SO LET’S GO WALK INTO THE FUCKING MIRROR, BECAUSE EVERYTHING IN THE MIRROR IS OPPOSITE IN AN INCONSISTENT AND NONSENSICAL WAY, USING A PORTAL DEVICE THAT JUST SUDDENLY EXISTS WITH NO REASONABLE EXPLANATION AND THEN RIMMER KICKS THE PHYSICAL MANIFESTATION OF DEATH IN THE BALLS.”

    And that was still better than whatever the fuck Back in the Red Part 3 and Pete Part 2 were supposed to be.

    Moonlight
    Participant

    When watching Red Dwarf, skip right from Nanarcy to Back to Earth.

    I thought of this too, but you came up with more reasons than I had. And the idea of using the resurrected crew to do a true series in pre-accident Dwarf is another one I’ve always wished they’d done.

    I do think though that the Series VIII ending, minus the Death stuff obviously, could have held a lot of weight in an episode that wasn’t one big pile of nonsense. Need to cure for a virus? JUST FUCKING WALK THROUGH THE MIRROR, THEY’LL HAVE IT. Just build a portal machine using — no, fuck it, just cut to it completed. And by “everything’s opposite” we mean operating on cartoon logic. Mirror Cat is a genius, because at that point Cat’s only personality trait was being stupid. Thank god X and XI came along. Where did Cat even stay in prison, anyway?

    And don’t even get me STARTED on how fucking stupid the Remastered Blue Midget was, and VIII even added little arms so it could do air guitar. Because of course they would design shuttlecraft not only with legs but able to dance. And before you go “It was a simulation!”, why the fuck would a simulation that was meant to otherwise mimic reality let you do a fucking dance number with the shuttle craft? So, logically, we must assume that Blue Midgets are just able to dance like that in real life.

    You know I’ve seen people claim “Red Dwarf never took itself seriously.” Series VIII is what we get when Red Dwarf doesn’t take itself seriously. It threw all narrative integrity out the window and turned into one of those shows that thinks having jokes excuses it from adhering to any kind of internal logic. That’s the kind of shit Family Guy pulls, and NOBODY should want to be like Family Guy.

    in reply to: Where's Samsara? #216238
    Moonlight
    Participant

    bazookoids and the Starbug model and Skutters

    Why would you torment me? Especially with the skutters, I love those little bastards. They need to be the series mascot; Red Dwarf’s proverbial Pikachu.

    in reply to: Model Kits #216190
    Moonlight
    Participant

    My Corgi Starbug has been treated like a right dog over the years and the legs have never snapped.

    I have two, and the right front leg broke off of both of them within days. It seemed oddly specific.

    in reply to: Model Kits #216170
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I’d settle for new Corgi diecast models of Red Dwarf in the original and Series X designs, and a Starbug with swept-back legs.

    Because the legs on the original one will break off if you look at them wrong.

    in reply to: Who is Responsible for This Laugh? #216137
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I’ll give them credit, they at least shot it multi-camera like an audience show. Or looking multi-camera, anyway.

    in reply to: Who is Responsible for This Laugh? #216135
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Really? I had no idea canned laughter was ever more than a very rare thing after the ’80s, let alone being used for a popular modern sitcom like HIMYM. That seems so anachronistic.

    in reply to: Series XI Opening Titles Mock Up #215998
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Nice of people to say it’s accurate but I don’t really see it. A couple of shots were surprisingly exact but most of the footage in the actual title sequence was yet unseen and pretty weird and interesting it was too.

    It’s mostly the opening two being identical, that really stuck out. The moment I started Twentica I thought “wait, I’ve seen this before”.

    I just think it’s surprising that we had already seen that much of the opening montage in the trailers. That wasn’t at all the case with X.

    in reply to: Who is Responsible for This Laugh? #215989
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Ripping my VII DVD and I notice the second laugh in Tikka to Ride (I always watched the extended version so I didn’t know), not fifteen seconds in, is that fucking awful stock laugh laughing at the fact that Lister has just picked up a camera.

    I’m planning to do a fanedit of Tikka which would include replacing all the CGI with model shots, but it now occurs to me I can also mute that goddamn laugh by swapping in the audio from the extended over it any time it appears. Since it never laughs after an actual joke, I don’t need to worry about screwing up the real audience. Since it never laughs after an actual joke, you wonder what dumbass thought it should be there.

    I’d love to interpolate too and restore the video look, but from what I’ve found researching the topic that’s going to be annoyingly complicated to do without having to purchase specialty software, if it’s even possible at all.

    in reply to: Series XI Opening Titles Mock Up #215967
    Moonlight
    Participant

    This was scarily accurate.

    Like seriously.

    in reply to: Who is Responsible for This Laugh? #215676
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Say what you will about the superfluousness of ’60s canned laughter, it was at least well put together. You couldn’t pick out individual reused laughs, at not in any of the shows I’ve ever seen.

    I need to watch the deleted scenes from Series VIII again. I want to try to compare the audience reactions to the final, if that’s at all possible.

    in reply to: XI/XII Opening/Closing Titles #215675
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I hope they write “XI” in chalk.

    in reply to: XI/XII Opening/Closing Titles #215635
    Moonlight
    Participant

    That was a CG matte painting, not a location shot. Somebody didn’t watch the Making Of.

    Dickishness aside, I agree with you. Unless they have something way better we haven’t seen, that Starbug shot would make the perfect first shot to the XI opening titles. Especially given the similar (but not as well composited) Blue Midget fly-by that began the titles of X.

    in reply to: Who is Responsible for This Laugh? #215570
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Oh my god, I just heard THAT LAUGH that started the topic in Balance of Power Remastered.

    That proves it’s copy and paste canned.

    in reply to: Who is Responsible for This Laugh? #215516
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I have no idea how I fucked up the quoting that badly, but the edit function doesn’t work.

    Now I’ll look stupid forever.

    in reply to: Who is Responsible for This Laugh? #215515
    Moonlight
    Participant

    …why would they take this awful laugh and copy and paste it over the places no one laughed, even following lines that aren’t even jokes in the first place? Across an entire 8 episode series, even? I figured it had to be a real audience member because the idea of someone choosing to add that terrible laugh in seems so fucking ridiculous to me.

    Look at me, again being wrong for assuming competence.

    I know the VII laughter had to be edited as not to drown out dialogue, but the idea of them sweetening it just feels wrong to me. It’s totally unnecessary. Red Dwarf is not an obnoxious American sitcom like The Big Bang Theory where the audience explodes into laughter at every other line, joke or not. The audience should not feel like an entity within the show forcing everyone to pause all the time. Only the especially funny jokes should do that.

    That said, VIII’s over the top audience makes more sense to me if it’s sweetened.

    The one woman yelling “Woo!” at the triple thick condom line in Emohawk is pretty embarrassing.

    in reply to: Future guest star confirmed #215506
    Moonlight
    Participant

    My inkling is that the guest star from one of the set reports (sorry, I can’t remember which) who we’re supposed to know from both drama and comedy is Hugh Laurie. He’d be a great addition to the show.

    in reply to: XI/XII Opening/Closing Titles #214828
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I’d love to see the painting the ship opening used in Twentica to introduce the new series. They could finally make this shot work the way they’d originally intended, and not using terrible CGI this time.

    in reply to: A Purile but funny Red Dwarf #214820
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I find YTPs extremely tedious, but I liked this.

    in reply to: SERIES XI PREMIER IN EDINBURGH TOMORROW #214766
    Moonlight
    Participant

    You’re either incredibly simple minded or you’re just not willing to accept that this is what a lot of people think about some of the latter episodes or Red Dwarf

    I was saying that I think it’s very easy to judge the performances more harshly when you’re comparing it to the older episodes than you would if you’d never seen them. I never said that everybody does this, or refused to accept people can hate new Dwarf simply because they don’t enjoy it. Of course they can. None of this was intended to discredit anyone else’s opinion. I’m prone to comparing new episodes to the old in the same way.

    I’ll remind you one more time that I LIKED series X for the most part, and I also LIKED the new trailer. All of it.

    None of that was directed at you. I was speaking in general. I only quoted part of your post because you mentioned the idea of people expecting the show to be the same as it was 20 years ago and that’s what I was expanding on.

    in reply to: SERIES XI PREMIER IN EDINBURGH TOMORROW #214764
    Moonlight
    Participant

    But there’s a difference between saying “wish it weren’t pantomimey” and “these characters should act like they did 20 years and five seasons ago.”

    I get the feeling a lot of people are so focused on wanting the show to be identical the the classics that they end up discounting a performance as “off” not because there’s anything wrong with it, but because it’s different.

    For example, Homer Simpson’s voice is now very different from it was in 1993. Personally I much prefer his voice and performance from back then, but I’m not going to say the modern equivalent is inferior. It still feels like the same character, it’s just different. Furthermore, my love for the older performance is driven by the fact that not only have I been watching those episodes all my life, they’re also far funnier.

    It’s easy to say you should do it this way, but isolating an overall performance outside the context of earlier episodes and judging it purely on its own merits is difficult. You can’t unsee the classics you’ve been watching for many years.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf XIII? #214647
    Moonlight
    Participant

    At the very least I want the see the painting the ship pull out used in a promo. They finally have the technology to pull it off right. The Remastered version is the closest we have to the original vision of the shot, but we all know how shit that looks.

    I mean this kind of close-up shot is EXACTLY the sort of thing then new bigature was built for; I can only hope they’re also using it to recreate the fly-over credits of series I-IV, but I haven’t been able to figure out yet if it has a top or is just the side of the ship.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf XIII? #214643
    Moonlight
    Participant

    You know, Doug might be waiting until November because once Series XI airs everyone online will be posting reviews, going into what they think worked and what they think failed horribly. Perhaps he wants to work out how to improve on the show based on the most common criticisms of Series XI, and write XIII with them in mind.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf XIII? #214595
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I don’t think the movie would be better off being released in another medium because it’s a film script, a format paced and written totally differently from a novel or comic. And if we did see Dwarf in either of those forms, I’d much rather it be something developed with the medium in mind.

    For example, were Doug to write more novels I’d like to see original stories in an entirely new continuity from the originals since Last Human properly ended the series.

    in reply to: Hitch-Hexers Guide To The Galaxy #214018
    Moonlight
    Participant

    It’s been years now, but I remember starting And Another Thing. I have a memory of reading the first few chapters, but then nothing. I guess I got bored? I don’t remember thinking to myself that I was bored with it. One day I just kind of didn’t read any further.

    Glowing endorsement, right there.

    That said, I will definitely listen to this. Considering that it’d only be six episodes, even if it’s not particularly good I’d probably stick with it just to see where it goes. There will at least be the novelty of getting more material with the radio cast, whom I love.

    in reply to: Zavvi Red Dwarf X Steelbook #214017
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I want there to be a US release. I’m way too broke to be spending my money on steelbooks, but I’d like the steelbooks to be available to me.

    in reply to: Seems we have Scutters. #213683
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Even if they no serve no actual purpose in any of the stories, just HAVING skutters around would make the show feel more like itself again.

    in reply to: Zavvi Red Dwarf X Steelbook #213680
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I want to replace my entire movie collection with steelbooks.

    in reply to: Seems we have Scutters. #213678
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Well if they took it down, that pretty much confirms it means something.

    Incidentally, a search for “skutters” on Google yields a shitty 3D render I made like seven years ago using a model I didn’t make, and searching “Red Dwarf skutters” automatically corrects to “Red Dwarf scutters” because apparently nobody has ever seen the word written down before.

    in reply to: Seems we have Scutters. #213674
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I’m not normally this pedantic, but I see EVERYONE spell it wrong. It’s as if they never even picked up Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers.

    Also, FUCK YES SKUTTERS MOTHER OF GOD I LOVE THOSE BROKEN PIECES OF SHIT

    in reply to: Seems we have Scutters. #213671
    Moonlight
    Participant

    “Skutter”.

    in reply to: PLOTS FOR SERIES 11 #213143
    Moonlight
    Participant

    The Dwarfers time travel to the Titanic, have a lovely meal in the dining hall, and leave. Meanwhile, Taiwan Tony puts on a one-man show for the skutters.

    in reply to: New Red Dwarf model #213030
    Moonlight
    Participant

    “Bigature” is a fucking stupid word.

    in reply to: Guest Blogger's take on Red Dwarf #211987
    Moonlight
    Participant

    The rest of our loathes can be one giant, hedonistic flawsh flawfillment!

    in reply to: Should the Red Dwarf logo be refreshed? #211958
    Moonlight
    Participant

    I like it when Alphabet Man arches his nostrils.

    in reply to: Guest Blogger's take on Red Dwarf #211789
    Moonlight
    Participant

    Someone to flawtch over meeeeee!

    in reply to: Red Dwarf VIII? #211788
    Moonlight
    Participant

    While I admit the cracks in the show are becoming prominent by season 10 (and season 11 is actively collapsing under its own weight most of the time, especially in the godawful third act of “Saddlesore Galactica”), I didn’t tap out until 12 on my recent watch-through. Although maybe I’m being to lenient on them for feeling so much more like the classic era than the current season that I’ve been following merely the novelty of watching Simpsons episodes I’ve never seen before. Even if they’re rarely funny enough to be worth it. I’ve got nothing better to do, alright? Lay off.

    Aaaaaaaand this is turning into a “when did the Simpsons stop being funny” debate. But then again those are a lot less clear cut than the same debate for Dwarf, since almost everyone can agree it crashed and burned after VII. Minus of course those who dislike VI for being too formulaic, but their opinions are bad and they should feel bad. (I’ll just state for the record here that I don’t think that that’s an unreasonable criticism, it’s just that with only six episodes it doesn’t last long enough to become repetitive in my opinion).

    Now, the REAL Dwarf debate is whether it got good again, and if so in which season. This will become increasingly interesting to argue about as XI and XII come out.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf VIII? #211764
    Moonlight
    Participant

    >Either way, I’m not convinced cartoonish CGI and library music really helps its cause.

    But that wasn’t a library track, it was composed by Howard Goodall. It’s the same tune as the action sequence at the beginning of the episode.

    Moonlight
    Participant

    Series XI will be able to afford not one, but TWO disastrous model shoots before Doug has to step in.

Viewing 50 replies - 3,401 through 3,450 (of 3,509 total)