Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'RED DWARF UNIVERSE' started by Murray, Nov 15, 2009.
Fine... carry on
Even though I agree with Darren's side of the debate, I will just drop in a friendly reminder to lay off any ad hominem personal insults (this goes for everyone - I'm not saying he's the only offender, it just jumps out as me as the most recent example). Attack the argument, not the arguer!
*cough* *deep breath*
Refer back to the previous however many posts have been made stating this point for the reason why a ratings success for Dave doesn't equal a success for Red Dwarf. Unless you now rate Red Dwarf on the same level as shows like Driving Wars and Argumental.
I can't believe that even staunch defenders of Back To Earth say "Well, comedy wasn't high up on the list of priorities for Back To Earth", and yet people still try and claim that Back To Earth wasn't a failure. It's Red Dwarf. If it's not succeeding at being a comedy, it's failed. Red Dwarf is a show that's remembered for making people pee their pants laughing. If it isn't doing that ... it's failed. Simple as.
can we all just agree murray is norman lovett and move the smeg on from this thread!!!!!!
Alternatively, how about you refer back to the people telling you that, whatever you might think, what you are stating here is incorrect?
Yes, because Norman Lovett didn't like Back To Earth and thought it was embarrassing. Therefore he's a bitter old man who's jealous of not being asked to be in it.
You're not one of those people, are you? The Lovett-haters?
Because nobody has attempted to do so. The only response given is a circular argument, that it must be a success because it got commissioned for a new series, and that it got commissioned for a new series because it was a success. Nobody's addressed the issue that "success" by Dave's standards is merely getting viewing figures in six digits, and that Red Dwarf just might be worth more than that as a cult sit-com.
I mean come on, if Blackadder: Back And Forth was done by Dave, they'd have tried to commission a new series for it. Not because it was good (it was tosh), but because it'll get them a few more viewers than the lousy dregs they usually attract. Same with Red Dwarf in this instance. Where exactly has any of that been addressed as being "incorrect"?
Is there really any need to call Dave's entire lot of viewers "lousy dregs"? :?
Anyway yes, there should be more Red Dwarf. Lot's of delicious Dwarfy goodness.
well i was joking but im seriously starting to wonder now
i aint a norman lovett hater, nor are most the other people who have claimed he is bitter, so shows how little you know about the fan base
Guys a SELF EDIT SO AS TO CONFORM TO FORUM REGULATIONS! He seems to confuse PERSONAL OPINION with STONE COLD FACT and refuses to accept that somebody else might even have a differing opinion.
At the end of the day, THERE IS GOING TO BE MORE DWARF. A stone cold fact....deal with it. Now can this thread disappear into oblivion. It does seem kinda redundant now....especially when people only selectively read what they want to and ignore stuff that shows them up...
why encorage him?
In reference to the actual title of this thread, the fact is there is going to be more "Red Dwarf".
As someone who was lucky enough to be in the audience on December 16th, I am very glad of it. The show I saw was fresh, original, in character and bloody funny. Each scene had several takes and I actually found myself laughing the 2nd or 3rd time I heard some of the jokes. They were that good.
I respect the right of the threadstarter and others to be sceptical about a new series, but maybe they should wait until they've seen it before declaring it unfunny.
It's not "the only response given", actually. It's just the only response that you've responded to.
The times that your point has been addressed as incorrect are all the times that it was pointed out to you, armed with quotes from mainstream media sources, that the ratings were actually a "success" in the entire history of non-terrestrial television.
The ratings were approximately four times what would be considered "a success for Dave". Therefore, your statement that they were nothing more than a success for Dave is incorrect. I might as well say that the ratings for the moon landing were a success by Dave's standards - they were, but they were also significantly more than that.
For crying out loud, You have just proved my (and everyone else's) point valid, Dave are the ones who decide if they want to commision a new series, if BTE was a success for them, hey presto, new series!!!
I would love more delicious Dwarfy goodness. What we got was Back To Earth. Which even by ori-STUDFARM's admission couldn't even be classified as a comedy it was so unfunny. Hence why there shouldn't be any more.
You could have fooled me. The abuse he got from most people (not just on these forums either) tells a different story.
Mate, I've been trying not to bring it up, seeing as you don't seem to want to discuss it anymore ... but you said on the last page that the show wasn't even a real comedy anymore after what they did to Back To Earth. That's a defender of BTE admitting that Dave turned Red Dwarf into something that wasn't even comedy anymore. And then you conveniently started ignoring any response to that and said "Right, I don't want to discuss this anymore, THIS GUY IS A [swearword] IGNORE HIM".
So can we not go down the road of people ignoring things which have shown them up, please?
Because, as I've said so, so many times ... that doesn't mean anything. It's a complete and utter red herring argument.
Dave are not part of some family called "multichannel TV". Multichannel TV is not some big conglomerate trying to help each other out. Dave do not act in the interests of multichannel TV, they act in the interests of Dave, and whether something was a multichannel success or not means absolutely nothing to them when they're deciding to commission a series or not; they're not getting money for something having lots of viewers in comparison to other multichannel TV stations, they're getting money for it having more viewers on their station. When we're assessing what Dave are going to do to Red Dwarf and what their decisions are motivated by (and anybody who doesn't primarily want Dave's decisions to be motivated by wanting to put out a quality, funny Red Dwarf product can't call themselves a fan), the fact that it was a "big multichannel success" means nothing to them. It's a nice piece of paper to put up on the fridge when the relatives come round, maybe. When deciding what to actually do ... all they care about is whether it was a success for them. That's why I say success for Dave ... it's the only variable here which matters.
And a success for them constitutes programmes like the ones I've previously mentioned, utter rubbish like Driving Wars and Argumental. If they think it'll get them any viewing figures above the rubbish ones they currently get, they'll do it ... regardless of whether the quality of Red Dwarf suffers. And the quality of Red Dwarf did suffer with Back To Earth.
Some people here are trapped in a circular argument of "series was commissioned because BTE was a success/BTE was a success because a new series has been commissioned". This is, obviously, poppycock. Why not just admit the fact that Dave would flog Red Dwarf until its a withered, corpse-like shadow of itself if they think it'll get them any viewers above the garbage numbers they usually get? They're a ratings vampire, wanting to suck the Red Dwarf franchise dry for viewers even if the show suffers immensely. And is that what anyone wants for Red Dwarf, really?
There's a reason why no new Red Dwarf was commissioned by the BBC.
I've been to a lot of shows to be in the audience, and the "audience effect" is very real. What you pee yourself laughing at in an audience surrounded by hundreds of like-minded people suddenly seems very different when you watch it on your TV at home. Not just me saying it, I've heard people say the same thing about Series 8.
And I reserved judgement over Back To Earth until I saw it. That was a calamity. There's no reason to suggest that Naylor's suddenly become a better comedy writer in the last couple of years (or the last decade either, given his performance as writer of Series 7-8).
Murray, the only plausable explaination is that you are purposely trying to cause arguments and are doing this on purpose.
What is difficult to understand?
Dave = happy (ratings success)
Red Dwarf fans = happy (new series of Red Dwarf)
So what if you didnt like BTE? Just don't watch the new series, it is simple!
Remind me who the co-owners of UKTV are?
How am I purposefully trying to cause an argument by stating that it's possible that Dave are compromising the quality of Red Dwarf to grab themselves a few extra ratings? That's just childish of you.
Red Dwarf fans are obviously not going to be happy if the show is turned into a rotting corpse of its former self merely to get a small channel some ratings. I don't believe you speak for all of them, do you? I don't know any real fan who would be happy about seeing Red Dwarf be turned from a cult television icon into an embarrassing Dave show.
I'm sorry, I don't care whether Dave is happy. I just care about Red Dwarf being high quality. What's so difficult to understand about that?