Episode 5 - Dear Dave

Discussion in 'RED DWARF UNIVERSE' started by Slainmonkey, Oct 31, 2012.

  1. Reznor

    Reznor Guest

    ism words keep popping up in every topic
    is that what you ppl really focusing on?
    any reallly old school members from here remember when 5 or 6 or 7 and 8 came out was it like this orrr? :O
    and craig does get called on for bonking everything ;-)
     
  2. Seymour_Clufley

    Seymour_Clufley First Technician

    Messages:
    197
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    I agree about that.

    There are no female equivalents for the male insults b*****d and p***k. Are those words sexist and would you seek to end their usage on the grounds that women were being "left out"?

    Why do you think that might be? Do you think it might be connected with the fact that men have an infinite number of sperm whereas women have a very finite number of eggs and a limited span of time in which to create children? Do you think it might be connected with the respective gender roles for men and women - eg. that women are more caring/nurturing etc. than men and society/culture has been built up around them raising children, and expects them to do that?

    If one relies wholly on it, yes, but don't you think stereotypes have some basis in truth? I certainly do.

    Of course there are possessive and controlling men - but we call them "possessive" and "controlling"; they are exceptions. Women doing these things is far, far more common - in fact it's so common that we just accept it as fairly normal (if undesirable) female behaviour.

    Given that men and women are so very different, how do you think sexism can be eradicated? Or would you disagree that men and women are very different?

    Is your view that we should take every individual as he/she comes, and make no "group" statements whatsoever unless they can be scientifically demonstrated to be true of the entire group?
     
  3. Angelic_Storm

    Angelic_Storm Catering Officer

    Messages:
    398
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    I wasn't focussing on it, I only engaged in the topic after it was brought up by someone else. ;-)

    Whilst I am an old school Dwarf fan, and watched all the series when they originally aired, I did not have internet access at the time. Was there even a Dwarf online forum during the days of series 5, 6, etc.? I would imagine even if there was one, there wouldn't have been many members, as the early-mid 90's was still a time when most people didn't have internet access.

    I don't recall any great hullabaloo over anything during the original series' run. The internet is way more prevelant now though, which definitely has a great effect on a large number of opinions being made public in a very short space of time.

    Craig, or Lister? lol Anyway, the bonking Kryten thing was an elobarate visual gag, he wasn't really making it with Kryters! :P


    Except that the "b" word isn't a word specifically pertaining to men. The actual meaning of the word, is anyone male or female, that is "illigitemate", or born out of wedlock. Though it is true that the word is mainly used as an insult towards males, rather than women, it is still not a label that is exclusively reserved for men. I don't hear it much used as an insult towards females, but I certainly have heard it. For example, there's a famous scene in the sitcom One Foot In The Grave (and a brilliant sitcom it is too!) where the lead male protagonist Victor Meldrew refers to the female head of an old people's home as "an evil, loathsome bastard." Again, the "p" insult is not exclusively reserved for males, although it is mostly used in conjunction with men.

    Of course, I am aware of why that double standard is there, but it is a double standard nonetheless. Especially nowadays when we're supposedly living in so-called more enlightened times. I just think it's unfair that women who are promiscuous are generally castigated for that, whilst men are not. And I don't think that viewpoint is unreasonable at all. Personally, I can't really relate to people who are promiscuous, but each to their own, as long as nobody is being hurt. I do see the point you're making, but it doesn't stop the fact that it is sexist that there are only negative terms for promiscuous females (but none for males).

    No, I don't think they do, at least not as a general rule. Some people think that all black people are violent thugs, some people think that all gay men are very effeminate and great at hairdressing and interior design, etc... which are just some examples of ridiculous stereotypes that don't really have any basis in fact whatsoever. Those stereotypes are based on a very limited knowledge that an individual has of a certain group of people. And even if they did have some basis in truth, there are always exceptions to every rule, which is why I tend to steer clear of using stereotypes if at all possible.

    There is absolutely no evidence for that assertion. And I have seen many people claiming the total opposite, that it is actually men who are more likely to be possessive in a realationship. But I don't think there is any concrete evidence to back up either assertion, so I simply think that men and women can be just as bad as each other when it comes to that. Strangely enough, it's mainly men who think women being possessive is far more common, and it's usually women who hold the opposite viewpoint. It's also relevant to note that women who are being controlled by men are far less likely to open up about that than a man in the same situation. Mainly because when a man is controlling, violence is regularly used as a tool to help him to do that. Whilst women are certainly also capable of this, it is mainly men who do that.

    That's an interesting question. Women and men should be treated as equals, but that doesn't mean that I think women should be treated "as" men. There are differences between the sexes, I wouldn't dispute that. But those differences do not mean that one sex is superior over the other. And that's what sexism boils down to. Treating one sex as lesser than the other. I don't think sexism should be accepted just because there are differences between the sexes. So I don't think it's unreasonable that sexism can be eradicated whilst also acknowledging that men and women are different.

    Well, as I said earlier, I don't think there is any personality trait negative or positive, that is exclusive to either sex. The problem with making "group statements" is they will inevitably be including some people for who those statements will not ring true for. The fact is, not all men are the same, and not all women are the same.
     
  4. Freeborn

    Freeborn Flight Co-Ordinator

    Messages:
    8,313
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2009
    Location:
    The Land of Freebornia
    With all due respect...and I do respect ya'...sir, I've seen all the DVD docu's and listened to the commentaries on more than one occasion and I don't recall anyone stating that they included bunk scenes specifically because series seven didn't have them. Or because they thought the setting itself would somehow magically make the show better...that would be silly. However, perhaps I'm overlooking or misremembering something here.

    But obviously when written well, character-based banter scenes in confined spaces [eg: "bunk scenes"] work wonderfully. And in my personal opinion this was proven once again at the beginning of Back In The Red. Although you obviously disagree with that. But hay, we all have have slightly differing tastes so that's fine. But for me personally I felt that restoring the bunk room (albeit in the jail setting) was merely an understandable way to create some kind of familiarity. And one that tends to work well for those kind of dialogue scenes, in my opinion.

    I can only speak for myself of course, but when I personally use the term "bunk room scenes" it doesn't necessarily always have to mean Rimmer and Lister laying on their bunks. It's just a quicker way of saying 'character-based banter scenes in a confined area of the ship'. And in the past that has more often than not been in the bunk room setting, or a similar setting. But it doesn't necessarily have be that specific setting.

    As you mentioned yourself Marooned is a classic example of this, as it's pretty much what I [and other's here] have referred to on more than one occasion as pretty much one long "bunk room scene" from start to finish. I think Bluey was the last person I remember saying something along these lines.

    But I still think the 'ideal' setting for such scenes tends to be having them literally hanging out in the bunk room or on the bunks themselves, but it doesn't have to be that specific setting for the scene to work [or indeed fail]. Much like the ideal setting for much of the character-based banter scenes in Men Behaving Badly tends to be on the sofa in their living room...but can also work well in the pub setting sometimes too.

    But yeah, essentially it has more to do with the quality of the writing, regardless of the setting. The dialogue is either good or it isn't. And setting a scene on the bunks will certainly not magically make it a better scene.


    As for the discussion about the use of the word "slag", as I said in my initial post here I didn't like the ending, and the use of that word is part of the reason. I'm not surprised that it hasn't caused a massive reaction though, or that many men don't seem to grasp why it's deemed so offensive by some women. People tend to be desensitized to such things nowadays. Words like this are now thrown around willy nilly on shows such as South Park, Little Britain, The Inbetweeners (non of which I'm a fan of personally).

    I would agree however that it wasn't meant in a specifically sexist way in 'Dear Dave', but because the term still tends to be used towards women specifically (which is just odd) it's completely understandable that some will take it that way. Most men don't call other men "slags" or "sluts". Although I personally have done so myself in the past. There is a Red Hot Chilli Peppers song in which Anthony Kiedis sings "She wants to know am I still a slut" which some people found surprising. And that's simply because it's so unusual to hear a man use the word in that context.

    It makes sense to me however that the term, if it must be used, should surely be used for both genders. But unfortunately we still have a lot of evolutionary baggage to overcome in this sense. There is still a lot of gender specific biased out there. In many cases women are still the main victims of this. Although it does of course go the other way in some cases too. Part of this may be that the counter reaction to the former has taken an unfortunate, and somewhat contradictory turn for the worse in certain cases. Much like so-called 'reversed-racism' or whatever. At the end of the day sexism is sexism regardless of the gender on the receiving end.

    Nonsense. Oversimplified, biased tot! However, Some women are like that. And so are some men. This really shouldn't be so difficult to understand.

    It concerns me that you're trying to turn this into a female specific issue. And that once again you attempt to use your own family as holistic proof to back up your oversimplified beliefs.

    Personally, from my experience I've seen far more possessive and controlling attitudes and learned behavioural patterns in men than I ever have in women. Most notably in my step dad, of whom was an utter tw@t, on many levels. And that's putting it mildly. But yeah, I've also had a rather controlling girlfriend in the past too (and other girlfriends who were not!). And I have many friends, both male and female who have felt, at one time or another that their partners were quite controlling of them.

    But I'm well aware that not all, or even most men and/or women are like that. To believe otherwise or to base my views on gender purely on a few individual personal experiences would be ridiculous. On the other hand however I can certainly empathise, and even relate to a certain extent to those who fear getting into relationships due to getting burned in the past, so to speak. But to judge all women and/or men on personal experiences is certainly misguided to say the least.


    Yeah I'd pretty much agree with all of that :-) As for the 'Load' album, I love it too. 'Bleeding me' is one of my favourite Metallica tracks of all time. But I have a slightly older friend who quite literally threw his copy away after hearing 'Mamma said'. I personally love that song, but he really wasn't a happy fan after hearing that. He seemed genuinely quite upset about it and said it was the final straw for him and that he would likely never listen to any of their newer stuff that may be released...bit of an extreme reaction I thought, but hay that's his prerogative, I guess.

    He does still love their older stuff however. It would be odd to stop listing to music one likes just because they don't like the newer stuff. But for a while there I began to think he may engage in some kind of burning ritual of all his old Metallica stuff, in a similar way Simon Pegg's character in 'Spaced' does with his Star Wars gear after seeing The Phantom Menace. :lol:

    :-) Fair enough. I didn't actually get around to giving it a second viewing yesterday. But I plan to do so today. So we'll see if my views change too. :-)
     
  5. Angelic_Storm

    Angelic_Storm Catering Officer

    Messages:
    398
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Fantastic reply! Everything you said there is 100% correct. :-) Using one's very limited personal experiencea of individual members of a group of people in order to judge everyone (or the majority) in that group is more than a bit foolish.

    Yes! "Bleeding Me" is my fave track on the album, and it is one of the greatest tracks Metallica have ever done. :-) I love most of the other tracks on the album too. As for "Mama Said", I'm not the greatest fan of country music in the world, but the raw passion James puts into that song makes it great. It's a wonderful, if very sad, song. I'm glad to hear your friend still likes their older stuff though, I know some fans even started bashing Metallica's old stuff because they're afraid of appearing to be "untrue to metal" if they admit to liking anything by Metallica, which is silly and childish to me. I don't understand some people... lol :?

    Hopefully I'll get around to watching it again today as well... there's not enough hours in the day I tell you! hehe :P
     
  6. Angelic_Storm

    Angelic_Storm Catering Officer

    Messages:
    398
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Uggh... yep, those ads are nauseating. Have you seen the very recent ad, similar to the Yorkie one, stating that HP Sauce is "for men"? They sure kept that a secret for a long time, didn't they? Guess that means I'd best stop putting HP on my food then... :P

    :-)

    Exactly. Funnily enough, I do like football, so there you go! lol Same kinda thing with the silly stereotype that all women are obsessed with shoes and fashion. I've never had any particular interest in those things, and never will. Heck, there's lots of men who care far more about those things than I do.

    Precisely! Stereotypes are stupid... lol :-)
     
  7. bedfordfalls

    bedfordfalls Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    1,876
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    It's hard not to when, in the case of racism, Doug chooses to make it one of the themes of an episode.

    Doug quite clearly wrote a B-plot where the "humour" relies on the viewer noticing the ironic nature of characters asking a racist stereotype for advice on racism. That's the joke, as clarified by the Script Editor.
    The "offense" people took in it (often deliberately misconstrued as people "not being able to take a joke" or "being PC") was (a) due to it seeming out of place in Red Dwarf and (b) that the intention wasn't clearly defined enough as something like South Park would have made certain to do, leading to worries that it might slip over some people's heads and just leave them laughing at the awful sterotype, in the same way that people miss the irony in Alf Garnett or Borat or the comedy of someone like Ricky Gervais.
    That some people have actually defended TT and tried to make out that he isn't supposed to be offensive (despite this being Doug's intention) validates this concern.

    As for sexism. I don't think Dear Dave is particularly sexist (although it is rather laddish) as it doesn't actually portray any female characters (vending machines aside) but the final line does show a naivety in the writer towards how it might be taken by the female side of the audience, which is what's led people to talk about Doug's (and to be fair Grant Naylor's) writing in general, which has never been strong on female characters or characterisation.

    Doug's certainly not the only male writer who can't write female characters (and indeed there are many female writers who struggle equally with male characters) but from what we've seen of his attempts, it is perhaps a good indication as to why he shouldn't try.
     
  8. BruceFivesyth

    BruceFivesyth Third Technician

    Messages:
    46
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2012
    Only just had the chance to watch this ep...

    Unfortunately plot and characterization are important for me when watching any sitcom and this episode was left sadly lacking. I didn't believe in anything that was happening and these are not the same characters who I loved in the early series of the show. It seems like the cast are almost appearing at a convention because their performances are so OTT and Chris Barrie again struggled.

    Really disappointing.
     
  9. bedfordfalls

    bedfordfalls Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    1,876
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    With the makeup of the audience, they pretty much were.

    When people who were offended by the "slag" word admit to laughing at it anyway on the night due to being caught up in the moment, then those people need to think about what they are contributing to the "performances". What is Doug supposed to think? "Well I thought that might have offended a few people but they all seemed to laugh....wait, why are they now saying they were offended after the airing?"

    Red Dwarf should not be a pantomime. An audience may well help actors with their comic timing but this particular audience seems to also cause them to put in pantomime performances because they are so uncritical and will laugh at anything the cast do. I don't know what the answer is to this problem other than to reassess where you get your audience from in series 11...because at this point an audience filled with Red Dwarf fans is simply a distraction for both the actors and, if feedback is to be believed, from the viewers too.

    We've gone from a situation where the lack of audience reaction in BTE was bemoaned as a missing ingredient to the other extreme, an audience who would laugh at a scene where Lister sat peeling an orange and who distract the viewers with their constant guffawing over the slightest line, often missing actual jokes by doing so.

    Watch some old episodes of Porridge or some other classic sitcom and see the difference. There are long, long passages where the audience are quiet or during which there is gentle laughter...then the occasional woofer - as a result its much easier to get pulled into the story. Old Red Dwarf was like this too.
    Now its rapid fire bursts of laughter every 20 seconds even at the slightest thing such as Lister banging his chair on the wall.

    Its ridiculous.
     
  10. dodgebizkit

    dodgebizkit Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    2,321
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2012
    There is nothing sexist, racist, homophobic, robotistic, or anti-chicken in red dwarf, it is a Somme fun sci fi sitcom. Anyone who chooses to be offended by it is seriously sad.

    Dear dave was a nice little filler episode with some nice backstory and classic lines, love it.
     
  11. Seymour_Clufley

    Seymour_Clufley First Technician

    Messages:
    197
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    I agree, but the writing is also to blame. I'm sorry to say it yet again, but there is no pathos in this series. There are no "quiet" scenes.
     
  12. Rue_Dwarf

    Rue_Dwarf Supply Officer

    Messages:
    605
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2012
    Location:
    Drofmor, somewhere near nodnoL
    This. :-) Nice and simple, like the episode :-)
     
  13. pad_ehh

    pad_ehh Catering Officer

    Messages:
    341
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Location:
    Starbug
    I sadly have to agree with others, this was a boring episode with an awful story rehashing old episode plots and jokes. I'd almost tie this with Lemons as the worst episode of Series X so far.

    Here's hoping that The Beginning finishes the series off on a high point.

    Having re-watched the series so far, these are my current episode ratings:-

    5/10 - Trojan
    6/10 - Fathers & Suns
    2/10 - Lemons
    7/10 - Entangled
    3/10 - Dear Dave
     
  14. dodgebizkit

    dodgebizkit Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    2,321
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2012
    I think the problem is that we aren't used to this RD episode a week thing any more. 13 years since the last time you could have this experience, most of us got into RD through video tapes, DVDs or internet where you watch one episiode, then the next and the next until you gotta go to work or class or sleep or your girlfriend wants a bit and you have to give in...
    And so we would have a flow of episodes, a complete series in one or 2 sittings if we wanted and had time, we didn't sit there watching one episode we'd waited all week for, analyse it thoroughly and then rewatch it countless times through the week while waiting for the next, getting nitpicky breaking it down and reviewing it online, we just watched it as a series.

    And I must say, watching ep 1-5 as a series is a completely different experience to just watching it one per week.

    DONT GET ME WRONG - I am so happy that finally I get to see a new series AS IT AIRS and wait for the next episode to be shown on actual TV itself and not ON DEMAND, and have the buzzy feeling of anticipation for the next, a great experience, but when you can just watch a series through as a series you stop the indepth analysis and nitpicking and enjoy the series, so I think everyone should try that with these episodes. If you didn't already record them or buy them on iTunes, do so, or if you prefer not to buy them twice and intend to get the DVD/Bluray then I'm sure you will find free ways to see them online, just don't give them to anyone who isn't willing to support the show by buying them... WE NEED SERIES 11 lol
     
  15. talkie3000

    talkie3000 Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    2,105
    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2002
    Location:
    Red Dwarf, Deep space
    Id be surprised if we didn't get a series 11 especially with all the interest and enthusiasm from fans and how well its doing on Dave and Itunes

    although i will say this i hope a series 11 improves on the bad points of RDX, maybe to much to hope for though
     
  16. Dsnow_con

    Dsnow_con Third Technician

    Messages:
    21
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Yes, it's been something that has been problematic this whole series, but in Dear Dave is seemed especially bad. A couple times I found myself wishing that I could turn the audience off, or at least down. I'm sure it was a wonderful experience for people in the audience, but when it actually detracts from a viewers enjoyment and the delivery of the actors something needs to change.

    I have no idea how you'd go about get a more moderate and paced audience mind you, but still...
     
  17. bedfordfalls

    bedfordfalls Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    1,876
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    While you're right to say that this is probably the first series that's been analysed to this level online, there are a fair few of us who can remember watching the previous series in the same manner we currently are.

    If anything having a forum to talk about it with other Red Dwarf fans probably helps the experience. There isn't the frustration of thinking "is it just me?" like there was when series VII first aired and there was that nagging sensation that a favourite show might just have jumped the shark but not necessarily knowing anything of the reasoning behind it.

    These days we all know about "bottle shows", production problems, budget restrictions and other ins and outs and can assess things like Dear Dave more fairly as a result...well, except for those who just chooses to ignore all of that and accuse Doug of laziness!
     
  18. BruceFivesyth

    BruceFivesyth Third Technician

    Messages:
    46
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2012
    I disagree. Every episode of Red Dwarf has been analyzed to infinity and people have 'nitpicked' about every little thing they consider to be wrong with the show. The only difference is that some people think that there are more things from from Series VII-X than there were before.
     
  19. Angelic_Storm

    Angelic_Storm Catering Officer

    Messages:
    398
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    You took the words right out of my mouth! I'm one of the ones who watched all of the original series' (I-VIII) when they originally aired, so I can well remember waiting in anticipation for my next fix of RD the following week during those years. :-)

    I agree with everything else you've said. I'd have loved it if I could have shared the experience of watching the original series' with fellow Dwarfers. And I think I'd definitely be more frustrated over flaws I've found in the new series if I didn't have this forum as an outlet, and to see other people's reactions to the new episodes.

    Bottle episodes can be great, "A Night In" from Porridge, and "The Trial" from One Foot In The Grave being wonderful examples of that. As for "Dear Dave", it is probably true I'd be more harsh on it without the knowledge of the things you just mentioned. Of course, that doesn't necessarily change my overall opinion of the episode, but it does temper some of the frustration and disappointment that I feel towards it.
     
  20. bedfordfalls

    bedfordfalls Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    1,876
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Probably just conincidence (!) but last night I found this.

    Yep, there are people who analyse the show worse than us, to a truly comprehensive scale.

    I have to say though...only 698? ;-)
     

Share This Page