Forum Replies Created

Viewing 91 posts - 1 through 91 (of 91 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Worst episodes of series 3-5? #261170
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Androids not producing heat seems like a violation of the laws of thermodynamics, no?

    in reply to: Craig’s Appearance in Series III #259953
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Craig to me looks markedly different in every series, particularly 1-8.
    I could confidently identify any series just from a cropped image of his head. It’s mostly his hair changes, but sometimes his face and weight too.
    It’s actually quite interesting how much his appearance can subtly, but noticeably, change within a year – especially in the years of his life when people don’t really age much.

    in reply to: The John Belushi Conundrum #259247
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    That awkward moment when someone confuses Chris Tucker for Chris Rock.

    in reply to: Did Red Dwarf plagiarise one of its most famous gags? #258766
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Who’s to say it wasn’t a conversation Rob and Doug had together and then told to Richard who turned it into a stand up routine?

    Going by the video Rob doesn’t seem to have ever met him, or even be familiar with who he was.

    in reply to: Kryten Costume on eBay #258622
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    It’s nothing to do with my browsing history, thank you. They appear under “People who viewed this item also viewed..”

    My browsing history is far more depraved than what would warrant these suggestions.

    in reply to: Kryten Costume on eBay #258541
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Is nobody else seeing the creepy fetish items listed below as “sponsored items”? Read the description of what “Spreader Pants” are 🤢

    in reply to: Your Unpopular Red Dwarf Opinions #258471
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    @RenegadeRob I agree with you about Rimmer. He’s easily my favourite character, but in the Dave era Chris Barrie’s performance is just way too pantomime for the most part.
    It’s the same with the Cat. EVERY SINGLE LINE he screeches it out in a high-pitch. He never used to do this. Remember how he says “good point, well made” after Kryten shoots down one of his implausible suggestions in series 5? It’s humble and pensive. These days he’d just screech something out while grimacing.
    Doug is obviously responsible too, in not wrangling these performances. I think Doug and the cast need to go back and watch the first two series and re-familiarise themselves with how they used to play the characters. As fairly realistic people, as opposed to over-the-top caricatures.
    Strangely, Craig Charles has gone the opposite route, and is way more laid back in his performance. I can see that being a development of the character, though. He’s mellowing with age. But Cat and Rimmer have gotten unrealistic and a little grating.
    Kryten’s doing okay.

    in reply to: Unanswered Questions #258411
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    They never said that Hoover assumed the position of president as a result of Kennedy’s impeachment.
    In fact, they state that he was elected – and that he been forced to run for president by the Mafia.

    So presumably Johnson served the remainder of Kennedy’s term, but then lost the subsequent 1964 election to Hoover, who by this point had left the FBI in favour of running for the presidency.
    Simples.

    in reply to: Swirly Thing Alert KCTS Special #256930
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    So it WAS Joel McHale on stage with them after all!

    Next question is: why the hell is he there?

    in reply to: Six Degrees Of Separation #256264
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Jon Gries was in Get Shorty with Gene Hackman,
    Gene Hackman was in Superman with Christopher Reeve,
    Christopher Reeve was in Superman III with Pamela Stephenson,
    Pamela Stephenson was in History of the World: Part I with Bella Emberg.

    Nick Frost > Buster Keaton

    in reply to: Misheard lines #251780
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I always thought it meant ‘people who are predisposed to eating yoghurt’ right up until I just saw this thread.
    It’s kind of ruined it for me now, though. I think that the ‘people who eat natural yoghurt’ meaning is much less funnier.

    in reply to: My Other Car is Starbug 1 #248963
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Back in the mid 90s I once saw a small red hatchback with a bumper sticker which simply said ‘Red Dwarf’.
    It obviously wasn’t official merch, and the typeface wasn’t remotely like anything the show has ever used, but I still liked the thought that a fan of the show had somehow procured it in order to dub their own car as “Red Dwarf”.

    in reply to: Unexpected Dwarf #243829
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Also Amazon Alexa’s response to “Do you believe in Silicon Heaven?”

    in reply to: Unexpected Dwarf #243828
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I played an American computer game called ‘Gone Home’ a couple of years ago, where you’re exploring round an empty house in 1995.
    In one room there’s a TV Guide listing a small selection of shows, including Red Dwarf.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Noel Gallagher’s taste in TV…

    Loves: Seinfeld
    Hates: The Inbetweeners
    His opinion on Red Dwarf: TBC

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    912 for me.

    in reply to: Star Trek Crap #239176
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Best film has to be II, although I do really like VI as well. The Motion Picture has some great visuals, but has to be the slowest film in history.

    The Picard series sounds interesting, but not exciting, and has the potential to sour the TNG legacy even more than their poor films.

    Lower Decks sounds terrible. Any adult animated sitcom based on Star Trek should be a parody of it, rather than under the actual Star Trek banner. But then we’ve already had Red Dwarf, Futurama, Rick & Morty, The Orville, Final Space; so isn’t this a bit of a dead horse by now?
    Sounds like the cringe-fest that was ‘Star Wars Detours’ – which at least somebody had the sense to cancel before it even started.

    Haven’t seen Discovery, but I’m glad it has a second season.

    Reboot Trek 4 – this is the only thing here I’d want to see. 1 and 3 were in the better half of Trek movies, and I enjoy a nice 2-hour story with the TOS characters.(although Quinto still hasn’t got Spock right IMHO). The possibility of Tarantino being involved is too interesting to not do.

    in reply to: theme music #239031
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Of the two styles I prefer the montage/guitar one, but I agree that each one suits that series’ tone well.

    The first two series are are much more subdued, and less dynamic than what would follow.
    From series 3 onwards the show has a greater penchant for explosions, creature effects, visual effects, Starbug crashes, and physical comedy; so the more upbeat theme tune suits those elements better.

    Anyone unfamiliar with the show who is channel hopping might see the original title sequence and think “This looks like a sci-fi thing, probably like Star Trek or 2001.”
    Whereas the series 3 titles make it much more clear its a sci-fi comedy. What I particularly like about the use of the montages is they really sell the show’s uniqueness, and the over-driven rock guitar theme really compliments that.

    The best montage sequence for me is easily the Series V titles, in particular because it demonstrates how there’s not really any other show like it on TV.
    You’ve got spaceships, hooded beings with glowing eyes, bazooka firing, a guy with an H on his head, a glove puppet, some kind of reptilian hands, strangulation, a person being turned into a skeleton, a robot headbutting a wall, a half naked man chained up, a guy with pointed teeth, and lots and lots of explosions.
    If that didn’t pique your interest in a show, I don’t know what would.

    Having the cast names included I really dislike though. Makes it feel like ‘Friends’ in space.

    in reply to: Americans watch Red Dwarf for the first time and it's… #238851
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    >WHAT?! Where?

    This is very poor quality, but you can see him here:

    I tweeted him about to check it was him, and replied immediately confirming it with embarrassment.

    in reply to: Americans watch Red Dwarf for the first time and it's… #238842
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    There’s also the argument that in their 3rd film, each actor gives their best performance (as they’ve become comfortable in the role, and the script has been specifically written for them). It’s tough to argue with.

    – Goldfinger
    – The Spy Who Loved Me
    – The World Is Not Enough
    – Skyfall

    Obviously Dalton and Lazenby never made it that far (although Dalton in Licence to Kill is great)

    On the flip side, each of those actors’ final Bond films was easily their worst:

    – Diamonds Are Forever
    – A View To A Kill (look out for Tony Hawks!)
    – Die Another Day

    Here’s hoping Craig’s next (and probably last) outing will buck this trend.

    in reply to: complaint about X's opening theme #238155
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    The stupid “clang” sound effect when the X appears is much worse.

    in reply to: Series III Certification #238043
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Aaah. I don’t remember that version. On Sky it just immediately faded out after the first “ow”, which worked a lot better.

    I’m trying to remember at what time of day they broadcast the episode where Skinner says “Stand back, it’s wanking time!”. It may have been when Channel 4 showed episodes post-watershed.

    in reply to: Series III Certification #238041
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    ‘Bloody’ must be the least offensive “offensive” word of all, right? I mean, it’s the exact same word as the completely innocuous adjective meaning ‘covered in blood’.

    “Police have discovered a bloody knife at the scene.”
    “Shut your bloody gob!”

    Would anyone *really* be offended to hear the latter but not the former?

    in reply to: Series III Certification #238039
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    >I always remember being baffled by the UK broadcaster’s cackhanded overdub of that Simpsons episode with ‘wankers’ in it (the U2 one).

    I don’t think they ever overdubbed it, did they? They just cut the word out entirely. Otherwise what did they overdub it with?

    I remember being utterly surprised when Channel 4 accidentally broadcast it uncut, as I never even knew it had been censored in the countless times I’d seen it on BBC 2 and Sky 1.

    These days Channel 4 make excessive cuts to The Simpsons, even for relatively harmless stuff. So much so I can’t be bothered with it.

    in reply to: Series III Certification #237991
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Exactly. The blowjob *joke* (I’d say “blowjob gag” has a very different meaning), is only rude and risqué if you know what is being suggested in that scene; and any children watching won’t, therefore it shouldn’t effect the rating certificate.
    I watched Ghostbusters countless times as kid, and never thought to myself “here’s the bit where Dan Aykroyd gets sucked off by a sexy ghost”.
    It’s part of a dream sequence anyway, so I probably just thought it was him having a weird dream where his trousers unzipped by themself.

    Not that BTTF is necessarily a kid’s film, but I’m sure there’s a few specific movies made for kids that have the word “shit” in them. Home Alone is one.

    Circling back to RD, it always seems odd to me when Cat says “does mouse shit roll?”.
    Not only because they’d always used smeg as replacement swear word, but they use it in a line that makes barely any sense.
    Does mouse shit roll? I’ve never checked.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Wasn’t the entire plot of ‘Krysis’ based around Kryten having a mid-life… crisis?

    in reply to: Doctor Who – Series 11 #237945
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I don’t watch Doctor Who, but I do love the theme tune (the later Tom Baker version is my favourite, when they put it in a lower key).

    Whenever there’s a new Doctor, I always watch the beginning of one of their episodes to hear what the theme tune’s like, and I’ve hated pretty much all of the versions since they brought the show back (Matt Smith’s theme was particularly unpleasant for me).

    I’m glad to read they’ve gone more electronic for the latest series. Looking forward to hearing it. Orchestral sounded wrong, and they over-complicated it with daft little extra flairs throughout.
    Minimal and electronic should be the sound of Doctor Who’s theme, as Delia Derbyshire arranged it.

    in reply to: Series III Certification #237868
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    >Yes, presumably every 12 became a 15 on home video until the 12 certificate was brought in for home video in ’94.
    That’s right. Batman Returns was a 12 at the cinema (as was the ’89 film) but a 15 when released on video, as they didn’t do 12-Certificates on videos back then.
    Presumably Warner Bros. hasn’t bothered with the Doug’s route of re-submission for re-classification, as they are still both a 15 on DVD and Blu-Ray to this day.

    in reply to: Favourite Bunkroom? #237762
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    The original bunkroom feels the most real and least “tv studio set”. I can actually believe in them sleeping and living in there.
    The BtE one is severely underrated.
    The X one I’m not particularly fond of at all.

    in reply to: BBC Two – new idents #237570
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    A few missing ones that remind me of the 90s are the firecraker one, the falling metal shard one, and the one that falls into a huge pile of cocaine.

    It’s surprising they never made a more sci-fi related ident, considering the amount of stuff they could have used it with:

    Red Dwarf
    TNG
    Voyager
    DS9
    Space Precinct
    Captain Scarlet
    Buck Rodgers
    Battlestar Galactica
    Space 1999
    Quantum Leap
    The X-Files
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Hyperdrive

    Even BBC One had a surface-of the-moon ident and a crop-circle ident recently. A missed opportunity for the 2s!

    in reply to: What's the most you've laughed at Red Dwarf? #237567
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    >I think I laughed at the opening of Tikka, when it first aired (yes, the bit where the camcorder explodes). But that was probably because I was just glad that Red Dwarf was finally back on the telly, and assumed there was more hilarity of that calibre coming my way. Hmm.

    The moment when Lister’s distress call comes back on and he says “Oh by the way, we’re in space”, is one of the funniest moments the show’s ever done for me.
    The follow-up of him describing a moon/planet with his thumb and finger sort of ruins it though (as does the rest of that episode, series, and well, I could on..)

    in reply to: BBC Two – new idents #237546
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Thank you for posting this!

    Red Dwarf in its heyday was preceded by most of these idents, so I think it’s very apt you posted this. What a nostalgia trip!

    The new idents are nice and all (if a little abstract), but I’ll miss seeing the old ones (several of which weren’t in the that goodbye sequence). Then again I don’t watch broadcast TV anymore, so it probably makes no difference to me.

    I think the [original] paint ident is the most iconic of them all. Special mention to the particle and yapping dog ones too. Reminds me of when BBC 2 was my favourite channel.

    in reply to: What's the most you've laughed at Red Dwarf? #237507
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Robert is consistently hilarious throughout V and VI, but Rimmer has do be the source of my most LOLs over the years:

    – ‘Out of Time’ when looking through the CCTV monitor at Lister’s brain in a jar. “Ohhhhhh dear!”
    – ‘Demons & Angels’ after conspiring with (or rather, at) Kryten about how they don’t need oxygen. The look he gives when he turns back round and smiles at Lister and Cat.
    – ‘Back to Reality’ “Well how were we supposed to know that, you brummy git?”
    – ‘Parallel Universe’ “A further thought occurs.. that we haven’t budged a smegging inch.”

    Basically, smug or sarcastic Rimmer is my favourite type of Rimmer.

    I really wish Doug would still write the character like this, and that Chris could still play him that way.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Howard Burden’s talking rubbish then, as I distinctly remember Kryten having very pointy boots in earlier series, whereas in later ones he’s essentially wearing DMs.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Series III-V is a soft-reboot of the show of series 1 and 2

    Series VII-VIII is a full reboot

    Back to Earth is a stand-alone remake of Back to Reality

    Series X-XII is a de-boot of series VII and VIII, and a sequel to series V.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    >Ghostbusters 2016 is actually an interesting case now I think about it, because the thing about “reboot” in the context of movies is: you don’t reboot films, you reboot series. So by calling a film remake (or different and long-awaited enough sequel) a “reboot” you create the inference that the film exists to spawn further sequels. GB 2016 isn’t getting any sequels for the time being, so is it still a reboot?

    Well the original GB continuity was a series (the two films and the 2009 video game [and maybe the cartoon?]).
    GB 2016 was planned as the start of series wasn’t it? (everything is these days). But it was a flop, losing the studio tens of millions of dollars. Had it been a success a sequel would’ve been inevitable.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Ah yes, at the end they mention Zuul; one who was a trans-dimentional antagonists of the original film. I guess that arguably puts the 2016 film in a parallel dimension to the the 1984 one.

    Regarding the new Halloween and the next Termintaor films which disregard previous sequels, The Simpsons coined a term which sums it up perfectly:

    Homer: “You guys saw the new Radioactive Man sequel?”
    Carl: “Uh, it’s not a sequel, it’s a reboot.”
    Lenny: “Actually this one undoes the stuff from the last one, so it’s a de-boot.”

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    >Ghostbusters 2016 […] exist[s] in a universe where the events of their namesakes took place […] acknowledging that the events of the other films did also take place and are connected to these ones in some way.

    Did it? I only saw it once, but from what I remember the existence of ghosts is widely considered to be fanciful in the 2016 universe (although, bizarrely, this is the case at the beginning of Ghostbusters 2 as well). Was there ever acknowledgement that they weren’t the first Ghostbusting business?

    That’s why GB 2016 feels more like a remake to me (though it is also a reboot, considering the cartoon series and video game). It essentially tells the exact same story:
    – Ghostly mayhem begins in NYC
    – University scientists set up a ghost-busting service
    – They create specialised equipment, hire an extra ghostbuster, and respond to various callouts
    – They discover a world-threatening event is coming, and get ignored by the government
    – They eventually battle the big bad, and save the world.

    Mind you, Ghostbusters 2 also follows this same template almost exactly.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    What’s it a remake of?

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    “Reboot” does seemed to be used a lot these days when “remake” would be more appropriate.

    I’d use “reboot” specifically for things that span multiple entries and media. “Remake” for anything which tells the same story as the previous version, and “re-adaptation” for any new version of something which originally exsited in a different media/format.

    But there’s a lot of overlaps.

    Ghostbusters (2016) is a reboot of the Ghostbusters franchise, and perhaps could be argued to be a remake of the 1984 film.

    King Kong (1977), and King Kong (2005) are remakes of the 1933 film.

    True Grit (2010) is a re-adaptaion of the 1968 novel, and not a remake of the 1969 film.

    Batman Begins is a reboot of the Batman movie series and a re-adaptation of (some of) the comic books, but not a remake of any previous film.

    Total Recall (2012) seems to be a remake of the 1990 film, and not a re-adaptation of the Philip K. Dick source material. It’s not a reboot of anything.

    Overboard (2018) is a remake of the 1987 film, with genders reversed. It’s not a reboot either.

    Casino Royale (2006) is a reboot of the 007 film series, a re-adaptaion of the novel, and not a remake of the 1967 film.

    The Red Dwarf movie seemed to have been planned as a reboot AND remake of the TV series, but with the same cast.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Another oddity of the sketch is that I’d estimate 90% of people don’t know Craig Charles is/was a poet.

    Most people know him as an actor from Red Dwarf, and a TV Presenter/Personality. He wasn’t even in Coronation Street at the time this sketch was made.

    So I’d guess the poetry angle is lost on many (if not most) viewers of Armstrong & Miller, and therefore the sketch makes even less sense overall.
    Obviously to Armstrong & Miller themselves it made sense, but again I get the impression they’re fans of Red Dwarf, and therefore know Charles’s background better than most.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    >Another double act doing material about Craig and Red Dwarf in this very odd Armstrong and Miller sketch I just found: https://youtu.be/lUEWsYns0yQ

    They make a brief reference to Red Dwarf in another one of their sketches. I think they might be fans.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    What if the Jim Reaper DivaDroid message was filmed on video, rather than using 16 mm?

    Bearing in mind that most Red Dwarf scenes in the 1980s filmed using videotape, rather than 16 mm film, the Jim Reaper DivaDroid message was unusual in that regard for shooting on 16 mm indoors instead before all other scenes would follow suit (and indeed proceed it). How would have filming using videotape affected the quality of that one message?

    in reply to: Does anybody have the full image of this? #235838
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    @GlenTokyo Ah, you’re right. They’re slightly different, but clearly taken within moments of each other.

    Having not seen that postcard in 15 years I’m surprised how well I’ve remembered it!

    in reply to: Does anybody have the full image of this? #235825
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I used to have a postcard that featured the first image in full, although I think the background had been cut out and replaced with a grey texture.
    It was free at my local cinema, so (given that this was in 2002) I initially assumed it was to promote the then-upcoming Red Dwarf movie.

    In fact, it was to promote the upcoming release of the first series on DVD.
    To the right of Rimmer was the circular JMC logo with the mountains, and underneath read the MiB-inspired slogan “Protecting the Universe from the Scum of the Earth”.

    in reply to: What if ITV had produced Red Dwarf instead of the BBC? #235785
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    *Sigh*
    For clarity, I was trying to quote Flap Jack’s comment “There aren’t even really any other sub-genres of TV comedy you could fit it into”.

    in reply to: What if ITV had produced Red Dwarf instead of the BBC? #235783
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Maybe not *TV* per se, but Mr Bean is very much in the same vein as the film comedy shorts of Chaplin, Lloyd, Laurel & Hardy, Three Stooges, etc.

    You wouldn’t call Laurel & Hardy’s short films a “sitcom” (but then they weren’t made for television), they’re defined as ‘short films’. Mr Bean is the same thing, just made specifically for television and not cinema (excluding the two movies, of course).

    I’d therefore class Mr Bean as “a series of comedy shorts made for television”. Not a catchy term, I’ll admit, but much more accurate than calling it a sitcom.

    in reply to: Episode/s with the worst audience? #235782
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Think I’ve mentioned it on here before, but there’s a woman’s laugh at the end (or beginning?) of the bar room tidy sequence in Backwards that’s really loud and weird. It sounds like a phone ringing underwater.
    Stranger still, it sounds the same backwards as forwards.

    in reply to: Favourite Special Effect #235554
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    A notably excellent Dave-era special effect is the moment Lister steps on an invisible beer can in M-Corp, which then spews its contents. It’s utterly flawless and convincing, and arguably the most perfectly executed visual effect the show has ever done.
    It’s nowhere near my favourite Red Dwarf special effect, but in terms of being visually realistic and authentic I can’t think of a better one.

    in reply to: Whelp #234999
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    It really is hard to believe that this was only 2004, considering how cheap and dated this whole show looks. This was Saturday evening primetime wasn’t it? Feels like it’s from the mid-80s.

    And where was the Starbug from? Doesn’t look like one used on the show.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    >I know it’s meant to be a shit joke, but it’s a shit shit joke.

    You’ve only just had it explained to you. Allow a little time for rumination.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I think it’s good writing considering it’s a deliberately shit joke.

    In fact it was perhaps the greatest deliberately-shit-joke ever broadcast for 35 years, until “spit on her wrist” took the crown.

    in reply to: Jokes you don't/didn't get #233998
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I think Robert Llewellyn mentioned ‘Lemons’ and I immediately tuned out.

    in reply to: Jokes you don't/didn't get #233989
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    >Makes more sense than Twentica.

    I was at one of the pre-screenings of that episode, which was followed by a very brief Q&A. My question was going to be “why the f*** was it called Twentica?”.

    I’ve since read that it’s supposed to be a portmanteau of Twenties America, or something. It’s still pretty baffling even with that explanation. Especially as it’s never mentioned in the episode itself.

    Sadly, I never got picked. The person who did get picked asked the much more pertinent and interesting question of “What’s your favorite episode of Red Dwarf?”.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    >It’s still a shit joke, though.

    That’s kinda the whole point, isn’t it.

    An old out-of-touch professor telling a cringeworthy joke in an attempt to appear cool and hip on a show for “young adults”. A show which itself fails in its attempts to appear cool and hip to its target audience of “young adults”.

    It’s supposed to be a shit joke to exemplify how shit Nozin’ Aroun’ is on several levels.

    in reply to: I like uniformity! #233925
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I never thought it was supposed to be anything to do with observational-style comedy, more that the Cat has a childlike innocence/stupidity in those early shows.
    (“I’ve got a note from my mummy”, “He’s your father? No wonder you’re so ugly”, “I’d prefer chicken!”)

    I guess he’s more kitten than cat in those early episodes, as a lot of his interests are the things that fascinate real-life kittens rather adult cats (shiny things, his shadow, string).
    Sure, he’s always gong to be stupid, but in the early days he’s also quite naive. He’s genuinely trying to be helpful by suggesting a missing memory might be found behind a fridge. Danny’s delivery of the line is also very childlike, rather than observational-comedian-like.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I’d watched every episode of The Young Ones dozens of times before I ever noticed him.
    He’s only in the first series though. The second series equivalent is those subliminal-type flash frames.

    in reply to: Your Unpopular Red Dwarf Opinions #233425
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    > You’d think people would (have) know(n) about it (and then forgot) and there would be numerous backwards people coming out of the hole three million years in deep space.

    We don’t know how long the time-hole was open for, though. It may have just been a couple of weeks or months, rather than a permanent fixture.

    It’s safe to say that nobody else was flying around the edge of Earth’s atmosphere in that particular region in 1993. And it’s even safer bet that nobody else was flying around that other point in deep space millions of years later.

    in reply to: Your Unpopular Red Dwarf Opinions #233415
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    In the TV episode, I always assumed they’d passed through a time-hole and reached a point in the (relative) far far future, after the universe had exhausted all energy and began to contract (big crunch). Everything that had happened prior to the end of the universe’s expansion was now happening again but in reverse.
    So 2018 went into 2017, which went into 2016 and so on.
    They arrived via the time-hole in (backwards) 1993.

    Perhaps this mean the same time hole originally existed in the real (forwards) 1993 linking it to a backwards ‘year 3million+’, somewhere nearer the beginning of the of the Big Crunch?

    In other words the time hole exists within our universe, and it links 1993 with a point in the year 3million+ but at the opposite side of Big Crunch. Traversing the time-hole takes you to a point in the life of the universe where time runs in the opposite direction from where you entered.

    I’m pretty sure this is more thought than Rob and Doug ever put into, mind you.

    in reply to: Your Unpopular Red Dwarf Opinions #233380
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    >i think complaints about the “science” are a bit bollocks, really. red dwarf has had lots of concepts that don’t at all make sense-Backwards World

    At the time at least, there were genuine discussions by physicists about the effects of ‘The Big Crunch’ including time itself possibly running backwards as a result of the contraction of the universe. I think this is both what inspired the episode, and might even be the explanation given by Kryten within it? (haven’t seen it for while).
    There’s been subsequent arguments that the suggest this is impossible, but for an episode of Red Dwarf the “science” of it is perfectly acceptable.

    It only become bollocks when they have stuff written backwards i.e. “Nodnol”. There’s no reason for that, given that it’s supposed to be our own universe with our own languages. Even if for some reason text WAS backwards, the letters should be mirrored, not just written in reverse order.
    And the whole newspaper story about a bank robbery that happens “tomorrow”, with guns sucking bullets – none of that makes any sense. The story would be normal, referring to a robbery yesterday, it’s just printed before it happens.

    If time really were running backwards nobody would know, except the Dwarf crew (this is the case in the episode, but the newspaper kinda contradicts it).
    Heck, time could be running backwards for us right now and we’d be completely unaware of it. I think that’s the most interesting part of the concept, but they don’t really explore it in the episode.

    in reply to: Your Unpopular Red Dwarf Opinions #233008
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    The BTE bunkroom looked way better than the X/XI/XII bunkroom.

    in reply to: Craig's teeth #232867
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Rimmer looked fattest in VIII
    Lister looked fattest in VI
    Kryten looked fattest in XI/XII
    Holly looked fattest in Skipper
    Kochanski looked fattest in VII
    Hollister looked fattest in VIII
    Red Dwarf looked fattest in V
    The GELFs looked fattest in VII
    The Skutters looked fattest in II
    Einstein looked fattest in XI
    Hitler looked fattest in IV
    Polymorph looked fattest in XI
    Cat has great metabolism

    in reply to: Craig's teeth #232862
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Why did Craig look so fat in series VI? Did they purposely make him look as round as possible?
    I think he probably was at his heaviest in that series (counting only the original run), but he seems to have been made to look obese most of the time.
    He looks normal in his long-johns, and the Bret Riverboat outfit, but when in the brown boilersuit he looks massive.
    The moment when the GELF bride kisses him, he’s like a huge potato with legs. I’m sure it wasn’t Craig’s actual physique, but it’s odd that they seemingly made him look really rotund in that one series.

    Then in series VII he wears virtually the same costume but with a belt tied tight around his waist, as if to say “See? I’m not really that fat at all”.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    @ Ben Saunders – If you mean Peter (not Stewie) dressed as a girl in New York, you’re probably referring to the parody they did of the title sequence from ‘That Girl’; a late ’60s early ’70s American sitcom.

    Like much of Family Guy, this sequence not only references something that most of its audience won’t recognise, but the same joke was also done many years earlier on The Simpsons.

    in reply to: The Important Questions… #232323
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Given that God is infinite, and the universe is also infinite, what would Red Dwarf be like if it started in 2016 instead of 1988?

    in reply to: Holly Question #232281
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    She’s aged better than most of the cast, but I get her point – she’s supposed to be a computer and therefore shouldn’t physically age at all.
    On the other hand; if they lit her a certain way, upped the posterisation of the video and maybe pixelated it a bit, I think she’d get away with it.
    Norman’s (visual) appearance in Skipper looked pretty dreadful. Badly lit and way too much makeup. They really should’ve brought back some of the Series I pixelation effect or something. He looks much better IRL than he did there.

    in reply to: Holly Question #232261
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    When has Hattie “stated quite clearly that she wouldn’t want to come back”?
    She did DVD commentaries, DVD extras, and regularly appears at comic con panels with the rest of the cast. With that in mind it seems odd that she’d categorically say she’d never come back.

    I saw her and Chris at an event prior to Series XI, and when asked if Holly was coming back she said “…not in series 11, anyway”.
    I’m guessing she knew that Norman had filmed his part for series XII at that point, and was therefore being coy by teasing the possibility that *she* might return. But she certainly never gave any impression that she’d never do the role again. I always got the impression she’s just never been offered.

    Besides, I remember just a few years ago everyone saying that Norman would never be coming back, that he’d burned his bridges with Red Dwarf – and look how that turned out.

    in reply to: Is Justice a deliberate retcon…or is Kryten lying? #230919
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Is there anyone left who doesn’t already know the twist ending of Planet of the Apes (1968)?
    If references in things like The Simpsons hadn’t already spoiled it for you, then simply look at the cover of the home video release. Or watch the recent reboot/prequel trilogy.

    in reply to: Misheard lines #230602
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I always misheard Spare Head 3’s line as “me circuit boards may have gone bandit..”. I only recently, after 20 odd years, realised he says “bandy”.

    What’s more, as a result of that mishearing, I’ve spent the same 20 odd years believing the word “bandit” to have an extra definition: adj. meaning crazy, out of control, or malfunctioning.
    I’ve even used the word bandit, with this made-up definition, in conversations over the years; oblivious to the fact that I was talking bollocks.

    in reply to: Thoughts on the Series XII Flipside Cover? #225526
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    This marvelous opus of pedantry must be kept alive, and so I’ll offer this:

    >… since, unless anyone wants to correct me, the first time “Series [Numeral]” was officially used to designate the series was on the DVD releases.

    Didn’t the BBC’s own adverts for the show use the roman numerals?

    I seem to recall a clip advertising the then-upcoming episode ‘Holoship’ using the “Sirs, they’ve taken Mr. Rimmer!” scene with the onscreen caption:
    Thursday 9.00 RED DWARF V

    in reply to: "Holograms don't produce heat, and neither do androids…" #225492
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    According to the current understanding of physics, time-travel to the past isn’t impossible, just implausible.
    Also, forward time-travel is possible according to special relativity and general relativity.
    So that’s all the time-travel stuff checked-off.

    Faster than light? “Apparent FTL is not excluded by general relativity, however, any apparent FTL physical plausibility is speculative. Examples of apparent FTL proposals are the Alcubierre drive and the traversable wormhole”.
    No problems there.

    Mind Swap? “Theoretically, a person with advanced organ failure could be given a new and functional body while keeping their own personality, memories, and consciousness through such a procedure”.
    All good.

    Anything else that isn’t in Series VIII can also be justified by browsing Wikipedia.

    EXCEPT thermodynamic-law-defying androids. That’s just dumb.
    I can only assume Doug Naylor wrote that line when Rob Grant wasn’t looking.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf poised to return for another series on Dave #225074
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Live show? I’ve never been to the recording of any episodes, but isn’t Robert Llewellyn notoriously dreadful at knowing his lines?
    You can see him reading cue-cards a lot in the finished episodes, and that’s with the benefit of re-takes. Fair enough; he usually has the most difficult, techno-babble lines to remember, but that IS how the character speaks.
    How on Titan can he manage a live show?

    And while were at it, Danny John-Jules often misses his cue from what I remember of Smeg Ups.

    Maybe they could just do the ‘Marooned’ live-show that Craig Charles mentions at any given opportunity?

    in reply to: Red Dwarf theme tune covers #224121
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    The Hu/Lambert version, that’s the one they played on University Challenge recently. Oh how I hate it!

    If the BBC can’t even manage to source their own original version of the theme, and use this piece of garbage instead, it’s not surprising that conventions don’t get it right either.

    It’s seemingly the most commonly stocked version of the tune, comprising about 99% of the world’s music titled ‘Red Dwarf theme’.

    They’ll be using it on the actual show next.

    in reply to: I forgot how utterly terrible the series X Kryten mask was. #223595
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Yeah the BTE mask was remarkably good for what was a cheap production, especially compared to what came in the series after.

    For me, the best mask is V’s. It looks the most realistically artificial (i.e.the most like a believable mechanoid, the least like a man wearing a rubber mask).
    Best suit is probably VI’s.

    in reply to: Bad Continuity in Gunmen #223556
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I don’t think the Inquistor costume thing can really be counted as an error, unless you consider his colour change between series IV and V an error too.
    Sometimes he’s in green and sometimes he’s in red. There doesn’t really need to be any logical reason behind it, so there’s really no error.
    Isn’t there both a red and green hologram when the crew are interviewing Rimmer replacements in Holoship? Plus the Hologram-Camille was in red while Rimmer was in Green. I think it’s just a way of differentiating people onscreen (particularly in the Inquistor case).
    In the real world, wasn’t the costume designer inspired by the Hologram-Camille to put Rimmer in red for series V?
    One of the reasons the Rimmer munchkin scene from Blue is a highlight of the series for me, is the attention they put into the differing Rimmer costumes of the puppets!

    in reply to: Bad Continuity in Gunmen #223552
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    >As it is we get a somewhat clunky line later that serves no actual purpose except to explain that he can switch between the two.
    He also does it again much later in the series 10 episode where he switches to soft-light to walk through a wall (Entangled was it?). It’s nice that this ability was established in a bit of clunky dialogue 19 years earlier

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Yeah, I realised immediately after I made that post that I should’ve also added “Mind you, Craig Charles can’t do a convincing scouse accent anymore either”.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Having heard his ‘Lister voice’ both in the shows, on the audiobooks, and on the DVD commentary, I would argue that Chris Barrie *cannot* do a convincing scouse accent. At least not to the ears of people familiar with scouse accents.
    Don’t get me wrong; he’s an excellent mimic, and truly talented at doing voices. But while he can sort of ‘echo’ Craig very well (Queeg), the accent doesn’t sound remotely genuine.

    He’s still better at it than Robert Carlyle in ‘The 51st State’, though.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I deliberately checked that they’d been referred to as a “she” before I made my post.

    Ctrl+F is quite a handy trick in these situations. Just something to consider.

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    The joke’s on her. Now she’ll have to buy the Series VIII DVD to find out what happens in Pete: part 2.

    in reply to: 'Jump The Shark' – Guardian article #221525
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    To be fair though, he never says it should stop being made. Some of the reactions on here suggest he wrote “I don’t think it’s as good as it used to be, so nobody else should get any more episodes, even if they still enjoy it”.
    To me at least, the last sentence seems to be questioning what the overall legacy of the show will be if you keep producing stuff that isn’t as good as it once was. He’s not saying it SHOULD BE CANCELLED.

    But, as Warbodog has said, once the damage is done, and you might as well continue.
    I’d further add that once you’ve reached the nadir (VIII/BTE) and you’re now improving (X, XI) then you may as well continue, BUT don’t kid yourself that legacy hasn’t been devalued.

    I’m always happy that there’s new Red Dwarf episodes coming up, but at the same time I genuinely wish series VIII never happened. I’m looking forward to XII, but part of me thinks that had the series ended with the margarita scene at the end of Out of Time, Red Dwarf would probably be held in higher regard. Of course hindsight is 20/20, and I would have always wanted a series VII.

    Like The Simpsons; I don’t want Red Dwarf to end, but I also think its critical legacy would be better if it had done – long ago. That seems to be the point of this article, not “Red Dwarf has been shit for years, end it now!”

    P.S. Barrie became disillusioned during VI and made the decision to not do all of VII. Now the article doesn’t present it quite that accurately, but it also doesn’t say he left halfway the production of VII either.

    in reply to: 'Jump The Shark' – Guardian article #221503
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Considering how brief this article is, it’s pretty much right on the money. Is there really that much here to disagree with?

    – He praises the concept, that cast, the writing, and the sheer originality of the show.
    – He says that by 1990, it was the best British sitcom on TV.
    – He points out that Grant left after VI, and that the Emmy award represents the show’s highest plaudit.
    – He notes that VII crept into comedy-drama, and was considered a disappointment.
    – That VIII was even worse, undermining the whole concept of the show.
    – That BTE was hugely anticipated, but inept.
    – Finally he says that X and XI were “much better”, but the chances of the show again reaching its early 90s peak are unlikely.

    Overall, that’s 100% correct for me. And judging by the results of G&T’s ‘Silver Survey’, it chimes with the general opinion on here too, no? Why is this article receiving such backlash?

    The one point I’d disagree with is that Barrie choosing Brittas over RD is the greatest snub imaginable. So I’ll give you that.
    But the rest? Remarkably accurate for a short, opinion-based, mainstream newspaper article about a cult TV show.

    If it’d been posted on here and not The Guardian, would the author still be called a cunt and told to fuck off?

    in reply to: The Orville #221340
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Yeah, I think a series should definitely be given time to find its feet, rather than being written off too early in its run.

    Look at Seinfeld and The Simpsons as examples of how poor their pilots / first episodes were compared to how great they later became (and then wince at how they later jump the shark).

    I just think ‘The End’ is actually a pretty strong episode, all things considered.

    in reply to: The Orville #221326
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I was about to say the same. Isn’t a pilot a show that’s designed to be used as a test, to give the network an impression of what the series will be like?
    It’s not necessarily the same thing as ‘Episode 1’.

    Also ‘The End’, if that’s what you’re referring to as the pilot, did a great job of setting up the premise; the humour; and the characters; almost immediately IMO. Not the best episode ever, but certainly not the worst in Series 1 (and funnier than anything post-series 6).

    What exactly is the interesting premise of The Orville? The trailer makes it appear to simply be like Star Trek but with jokes. (I’m not suggesting there isn’t an interesting premise – I’m genuinely asking)

    in reply to: Red Dwarf is now on BritBox in the US #219791
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    No, that’s Cat’s zebra print coat which was originally white (as seen in Camille) but the production crew later re-coloured using yellow felt-tip pens for Terrorform.
    So it’s a (surprisingly) correct image for that episode.

    in reply to: Red Dwarf is now on BritBox in the US #219786
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    What’s the story behind the ‘Only the Good’ image? Lister with a mustache? I don’t remember that.
    Also the ‘Tikka To Ride’ image appears to be some kind of behind-the-scenes rehearsal photo (Rimmer and Kryten aren’t in their proper costumes).

    It’s interesting that this site has access to these seemingly rare photographs (and also quite interesting that it appears to be some kind of BBC / ITV joint enterprise).

    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I just meant I was pleased that Howard Goodall never wrote *those* synth-version lyrics.
    I probably should have put a full stop before mentioning his second verse.

    Yes, his second verse lyrics are terrible too, but it seems apparent to me that he wasn’t taking them seriously, and likely knew they would never be recorded.
    RD wasn’t his first theme tune, so he probably knew just one verse would be plenty for the end credits of a sitcom. The additional verse may just have place-holder lyrics that he never bothered doing a second draft of.
    Then again, if you look at the normal 1st verse lyrics written down, they’re not exactly Wordsworth either. I think the singer’s performance brings a lot of credibility to them.
    Maybe if Jenna Russell sang Goodall’s 2nd verse it would have have been half-decent. Who knows?
    All I know is I hate the Hu & Lambert version, and the additional lyrics are only part of that hatred. That ending with the repeated chord, alternating between channels, is just atrocious.

    in reply to: Mindblowing thing I've just noticed about the Opening Theme… #218612
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I always heard it as “Velocity at time-warp speed” too.

    Does anyone know who’s responsible for those God-awful second verse lyrics? Or that horrendous synthesised techno version of the tune they are heard in?
    I had it on some album of Sci-Fi themes back in the 90s, and I listened to it so much it’s caused that crappy version to be burned into my memory. I can still hear it in my head if want (or don’t want, as the case will always be).

    I was pleased to see in the Howard Goodall DVD feature that he wasn’t responsible for those shit lyrics, and even had a second verse of his own.

    in reply to: Question about the stasis leak episode. #216729
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    “(It’s too recognisable as the Polymorph location as well. That always annoys me.)”
    Isn’t it supposed to the same location though?

    in reply to: Who is Responsible for This Laugh? #216369
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    Yup. That’s the one.

    in reply to: Who is Responsible for This Laugh? #216212
    Toxteth O-Grady
    Participant

    I can’t believe nobody’s mentioned the stupid laugh that’s heard at the end (or should that be the beginning?) of the bar room tidy in Backwards. You know, the one that sounds like telephone ringing underwater?
    Remarkably, I’ve even played this laugh backwards and it sounds exactly the same either way; utterly moronic.
    I don’t think this is a sweetened laugh though, but a genuine on-set laugh. One that badly needed removing.

Viewing 91 posts - 1 through 91 (of 91 total)