There should not be any more Red Dwarf.

Discussion in 'RED DWARF UNIVERSE' started by Murray, Nov 15, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Seb

    Seb Captain Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,796
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Location:
    JMC HQ
    For all your persistence about the "accuracy" of the figures you're quoting, you're forgetting one thing: BARB's figures are *estimated* anyway.

    You keep repeating this point, and I put it to you that it's nonsense. Back to Earth's figures weren't just a record "for Dave". They were the third-highest figures for any non-sporting programme ever shown on a non-terrestrial channel.

    In 2009, the figures for digitally-enabled households were still vastly, exponentially outnumbered by terrestrial (they still are now, but as the official digital switchover approaches, obviously the gap is shrinking). Therefore, the number of viewers that it was possible for a programme broadcast on a digital to get were significantly lower. The fact that BTE was only lower than TWO other programmes (Torchwood and Hogfather) in the entire sphere of non-terrestrial broadcasts up to that point suggests that it was at the very top end of what it was possible for a digital broadcast to achieve.

    And yet you're persisting in comparing it to terrestrial broadcasts, which have viewing figures that it was not physically possible for Red Dwarf to achieve. By your logic, I may as well say that Eastenders and The X-Factor and Strictly and Doctor Who are all "flops", because they get a tiny fraction of the viewing figures that programmes shown on American TV get. It's not a valid comparison. At all.

    Ah, it's the old "I have this opinion, so anyone else who has a different opinion is an idiot" thing.

    I think I can correctly take a stab at your age from the fact that you're still clinging to something like this. And I think I'd be right in suggesting it's not very far into double figures.

    But even if we indulge your argument for a second, and agree that just because Back to Earth had scenes set on the set of Coronation Street (not actually on Coronation Street, I hasten to add. Coronation Street isn't a real street, it's a lot at Granada Studios), it was rubbish, that doesn't change the fact that you're arguing that it wasn't a success because you think it was rubbish. Which is nonsense.

    I've got a challenge for you, though. Show me one mainstream impartial media source that calls Back to Earth a "flop". Just one. Go on. And if for every one that you find, I can't find one that says it was a success, then I'll admit that everything you've said in this thread thus far is entirely correct.

    And here you prove that despite your spurious claims of working in "the media", you actually know nothing about the television industry. Or, at least, everything you DO know about the television industry is based on how things were approximately a decade ago. Kudos!

    Here's a hint: catch up, for crying out loud.
     
  2. Julia

    Julia Catering Officer

    Messages:
    461
    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Location:
    Cornwall
    Wheres the 'like' button!!!!
     
  3. Seb

    Seb Captain Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,796
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Location:
    JMC HQ
    I will just point out that if anyone thinks BTE was rubbish, they're welcome to do so. I don't agree, but I know it's an opinion that a number of people have. However, please have a better reason than "Because it had a scene set somewhere" if you want to come and argue it on here. Or, better, don't argue it on here, just accept that people are allowed to have different opinions on things.
     
  4. Freeborn

    Freeborn Flight Co-Ordinator

    Messages:
    8,313
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2009
    Location:
    The Land of Freebornia
    It certainly made a nice change didn't it :-). But many don't take too well to change, especially change within something they feel so passionate about. Not that i'm suggesting that's the only reason some didn't like the 'Corrie' part, we all have different tastes of course. But i do think there's that element , along with (some) fan's preconceptions that likely make up a big part of the instant dislike for some.

    Much like when a rock/metal band releases a more 'mainstream', 'easy listening' or less "metal" \m/ (or whatever) album, it often gets judged by hardened fans as being bitcrap, period, or as "selling out" even. As oposed to being taken/accepted for what it is, and then judged as such in a non biased manner.

    Talkie Toasster wrote
    I'm sure there are. These things are rarely as straight forward and easy to simplify as they often appear at first glance.

    Freeborn Leveller -- aka The Veggie Vamp wrote:

    Murray wrote:
    Duly noted...But i've got my eye on you, buddy, oh yes, we're watching you, we're everywhere. In your tv screen, behind the curtains, in your cup of tea. We're the hidden cameras intergrated within your webcam. We are the spameras in spam. We see all. Oh yes, we see all. [​IMG]

    Ahem, sorry about that, went a bit weird for a minute there :P
     
  5. Julia

    Julia Catering Officer

    Messages:
    461
    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Location:
    Cornwall
    Well i for one enjoyed it, i thought the 'corrie' scenes were brill. I guess i do have a pet hate and that would be those who look for bad things in what they see and make a big issue of it. Ok i accept that you cant please everyone (hey we are all gloriously different!) But what i dont get is why cant people just watch it for what it is and just get taken in by it and ignor the fact its not real and is fiction, forget who made it, whos in it, etc and just watch the story unfold.. Isnt the whole point that its 40 mins of fantasy?...so must be veiwed as such or am i missing something? Anyway we all have differeing views and i respect that. I value peoples input as i would hope they would of mine, when i read a book im completely engrossed its the same with a movie or tv prog, i never see the bad in it unless i cant get it or happen to dislike the genre.
     
  6. Murray

    Murray Second Technician

    Messages:
    67
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Sorry, but I believe you're really far off the mark here. All of those shows except The Mighty Boosh Live have been superseded by being included in "Complete" box sets (which are all ranked far higher). Think about it, do you spend loads buying an individual series, or are you more likely to buy the boxset and save yourself money, if you like the show enough to be buying it on DVD anyway?

    Back To Earth hasn't been in any Red Dwarf Complete sets; the only place you can get it is by buying the DVD for it specifically. And it was released in the same year as the Red Dwarf Complete Edition that I compared it to (which is the only sensible thing to compare it to, I'll add ... no point comparing Back To Earth to say, the Series VIII DVD, when that's included in the Complete Boxset, cutting off most of the sales to it).

    This is all an inaccurate science as you've already mentioned, especially because we don't know Back To Earth's actual sales figures. But I'll say this ... I didn't have much trouble finding DVD sales numbers for a lot of those shows you just mentioned. But not Back To Earth. Couple that with the low ranking, and you can get the picture of what's going on.

    It flopped on DVD.

    The "tough competition" was Britain's Got Talent. Which you could maybe buy as an issue, but you would expect a surge in +1 viewings and a bounce back on the Sunday where there was no competition. And in reality, there was neither; Red Dwarf pulled in even fewer viewers on Sunday.

    The figures say what they say. Explaining it away by speculation on competition and timeslots sounds too much like executive excuses.

    I share the same view of Series Eight ... but how was it "the most popular Dwarf" in any respect?

    One man's success is another man's flop. In this case, a success for a digital channel like Dave is a flop to a mainstream channel like the BBC. I don't believe in bringing a show back with obviously inferior quality just because the show's reputation will get more ratings than a mediocre channel could normally get. That, to put it bluntly, is simply turning Red Dwarf into some kind of ratings woman-of-disrepute. And you can't say it doesn't show in the quality.

    I was hopeful of Back To Earth before I saw it. I'm not one of those people who wrote it off the moment they heard about it. But it happened, was horrific, scarred the memory of Red Dwarf for everybody I know (normal people who aren't huge Red Dwarf fans, but appreciated it's greatness back in the day) and was an overall embarrassment. That's why I said two years ago there shouldn't be any more Red Dwarf.
     
  7. Seb

    Seb Captain Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,796
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Location:
    JMC HQ
    You know those BARB viewing figures you place so much stock in? Er... those.

    But it wasn't ON a mainstream channel. As I've said above, it could not have actually physically achieved the ratings on Dave, or any digital-only channel, that it could have on terrestrial. It did about as well as it could possibly have done. You might not consider that a success, and that's your right, but with all due respect your opinion on whether or not it was a success means basically nothing to the future production prospects of the series.

    As has been proven by the fact that, despite your persisting with the argument that it was "a flop", they're in the process of making twice as much of it as they did two years ago.
     
  8. Murray

    Murray Second Technician

    Messages:
    67
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Um ... so are all ratings figures. You do understand what ratings figures are and how they're calculated, right? :?

    In that case, my memory of watching original Red Dwarf episodes when they aired is truly astonishing. :roll:

    Yes. Hence the word "set".

    Define "impartial" for the purposes of this. I feel, given your attitude, that word is put there to instantly disqualify anything I give you, in which case I'll make like Rimmer and just shake my head and walk out.

    I think you'll find that it's always been the height of stupidity to include re-run figures in viewing statistics. To suggest otherwise implies you're highly ignorant.

    You might want to dial down the attitude in favour of logic. Right now, this fella's looking at you:

    Love that guy.

    Of course people are allowed to have different opinions on things; we're not living in a fascist society, nor do I want to be. That doesn't make everybody's opinion right, though. That would be silly.

    If you're unprepared to defend the Coronation Street/metaplot/self-referential part of Back To Earth, you haven't even tried to knock down the Wall, and have been pacing around throwing insults at me instead. A waste of everyone's time. Defend it, or don't bother.
     
  9. Seb

    Seb Captain Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,796
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Location:
    JMC HQ
    I do. Which is why I'm saying that constantly using the word "accurate" in relation to them is a fallacy. They are the biggest bluff in the industry - but the industry can't live without them.

    I'm not saying they can't be used in an argument, I'm just saying the word "accurate" shouldn't be used in the same sentence as them. Unless that sentence is "BARB ratings aren't very accurate."

    Anything published by a mainstream media source that doesn't have a direct connection with/vested interest in the series. If anything, that helps you more than it does me, because it excludes anything put out by Dave's PR department.

    But it should be pretty obvious that I'm talking about BBC News, magazines, newspapers, accredited websites, etc. And I'm not talking about reviews, because we're discussing whether it was a flop or a success, not whether critics liked it.

    Try again. Timeshifted figures are now a huge factor in broadcasters' decision-making. HUGE. We're not far off a point where overnight figures will become essentially meaningless. Like I say, what you're saying may well have been correct five or ten years ago. It isn't, now. Categorically so.

    Otherwise, Doctor Who probably would have been cancelled by now.

    I do know what I'm talking about, you know. Outside of my work here, my day job is actually in television, and in an area that is highly determined by whether or not a particular commission is considered a success.

    I honestly don't understand the point you're making here. Are you honestly saying that nobody is allowed to like Back to Earth if they didn't like the Coronation Street bit?

    I love "Kryten", but I think the CSO shot of Cat heading towards Blue Midget is terrible. I love "Better Than Life", but I think the sequences shot on Rhyl beach look terrible. I love "Marooned", but I think the way Robert says "Blue Midget is loaded" is terrible. I love "Tikka to Ride", but I think the explanation for why the crew are alive, upon which the entire episode hinges, is terrible.

    These things aren't binary. It's not "love the whole thing" or "hate the whole thing". You don't have to "defend" the Coronation Street scene in order to be able to justify liking anything else that Back to Earth did. Just because YOU thought it was the worst thing about it doesn't give you the entitlement to erect this so-called "Wall" that apparently everyone else has to knock down purely to be able to express a positive opinion.

    However, to indulge you: I thought that the metafictional aspect of Back to Earth's story, as a fan of that type of fiction anyway, was one of the best things about it. It's not what I'd want to see Red Dwarf do every time, but as a one-off - especially as a one-off that was meant to be a celebration of the show - it worked fine, and Doug showed a clear grasp of the tropes of the genre in which he was working. And I thought that the Coronation Street scene provided some of the story's best jokes. Absolutely nothing wrong with it, in my book.
     
  10. Murray

    Murray Second Technician

    Messages:
    67
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    It could be. Or it could be ridiculously bad. We just don't know for certain. Something I'd say is that The Simpsons and Family Guy don't actually do as well on DVD over here as you might think. It's to do with viewer fatigue, because it's shown on television so often. I did a bit of digging in chart archives just for you, and Back To Earth never even broke the Top 40 for its category at any point after its release on DVD. That's in comparison to, say, The Inbetweeners, which was gandering the same audience as BTE at the same time, which was cemented near the top of the charts for months on its release. Not a completely equal comparison, as Inbetweeners got some post-digital airtime on Channel 4 ... but then, Red Dwarf also had the exposure of being Red Dwarf, so it conceivably balances out.

    The point is, we don't know for certain. Without official figures there's always doubt. But all the evidence doesn't seem to point to roaring numbers of DVD sales. I don't think anybody can claim it was a DVD success. They'd have released the figures, for one.

    In the absence of any and all evidence pointing to any DVD sales success ... I'm going to call it a flop. It definitely can't be called a success given that we'd have the evidence for it, so it's not that bold to suggest the opposite.

    Because the BBC and the Guardian are mainstream media, and don't always put things exactly how they are. You don't have to trust my judgement, you only have to look at the facts and come to your own conclusion: those media outlets reported it as a success because of its "record breaking viewing figures". Examination of those viewing figures reveal that a majority tuned out after the first episode, and that the "record" which was broken was for a niche category which is of no real importance. What's the success in beating all the rest when the biggest thing you have to contend with is Argumental, old episodes of Friends and general rubbish which nobody's ever heard of? A big cult classic like Red Dwarf would always gather some viewers under those circumstances.

    What you have here is the equivilent of Ian Thorpe coming out of retirement, racing against a group of amateurs in a small meet, and the media hailing it as a success because he broke records for that event. Forget what the media say: is that really sensible in your evaluation?

    Mainstream media outlets don't really do that unless there's good reason. None of them will say the word "flop", apart from in review pages (and I can give you oodles of mainstream media outlets which described it as such in reviews). Why not simply evaluate the situation for yourself? We have the figures in front of us. Why do you need a mainstream newspaper to tell you how to interpret them, exactly?

    Take Life's Too Short, for example. You'll find plenty of news articles describing the mirror image of what happened with Back To Earth happening to it ... the nosedive in viewing figures from first episode to second, etc. Why is it any different for Back To Earth, just because it aired on a channel where there's no competition to highlight it?

    And got the show cancelled, as I remember. It lost about 25% of its audience over the course of the series, it was so badly received.

    Hype gets viewers. Quality keeps them. Hype will get Red Dwarf X some viewers. The quality will lose them, and ruin the Red Dwarf legacy forever.
     
  11. Seb

    Seb Captain Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,796
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Location:
    JMC HQ
    You remember wrongly. Red Dwarf was never "cancelled". GNP decided in 1999 that they wanted to focus their efforts on making a movie, and that's what they spent the next six or seven years doing.

    After that, it's true, the BBC then rejected the opportunity to commission more. But Red Dwarf was categorically not "cancelled" by them after, or because of, Series VIII.

    ... and hyperbole will fuel pointless circular internet arguments for ever more.

    I think the main thing that continues to come out of this is that you simply will not budge from your position of what is true for your opinion has to be true for everyone else's.

    I know lots of people who hated any or all of Series VII, VIII and Back to Earth. But did those episodes "ruin the legacy" of the earlier ones? Do the earlier ones somehow stop being good for them as a result? Of course not. That would be like saying the movie adaptation of V For Vendetta makes it impossible for me to read and enjoy the book. Or that the existence of Superman IV takes away all enjoyment of I and II. Or that I can't listen to "Should I Stay Or Should I Go" because some irritating pillock did it on X Factor.

    I mean, I haven't liked any new Simpsons episode I've seen since about 2001. So I don't watch it. But I continue to watch the old ones, and there's still a huge market for the new ones, so they're entitled to keep on making it. If I'm honest, I'm a little disappointed that we've now reached a point where there are more "bad" episodes than "good" ones. But that's only in my opinion. And it's not so much that I wish they'd stop making it, as I wish they'd try and figure out what made it so good in the 1990s and recapture that.

    The only thing that would be embarrassing for Red Dwarf would be if they kept on making it long after all but a tiny number of viewers have switched off. But that would never be allowed to happen anyway. As it is, there's still a large and vibrant audience that enjoys the new material. Why should those people be denied the chance to see more, or the makers denied their living, just because YOU don't want to see it?

    Fanboyism is about wanting to see a TV show/comic/whatever made exactly how YOU want it to be made, and for it to be popular and successful at doing that so that your taste can be validated. Unfortunately, what fanboyism is so bad at is taking the tastes and opinions of other people into account.
     
  12. SoundableObject

    SoundableObject Catering Officer

    Messages:
    273
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool England
    "Oh give up, the guy's an idiot."
     
  13. Stephen

    Stephen Console Officer

    Messages:
    4,986
    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2002
    Location:
    Hillingdon
    'Like'
     
  14. Julia

    Julia Catering Officer

    Messages:
    461
    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Location:
    Cornwall
    Like 'Like'
     
  15. Murray

    Murray Second Technician

    Messages:
    67
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Again, sorry, context? Number 16 in the Science Fiction and Fantasy Chart (as the link shows)? You know what's currently occupying that slot? "Paul" by Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, a 2 year old movie that had its DVD release 6 months ago. And we have no idea how many weeks it was in there ... it certainly vanished very quickly, if it's true it was there, given the lack of any records of it (from official sources I looked through rather than a forum post).

    I thought we agreed that it was pointless discussing all this Amazon stuff on the basis that we don't know the figures? And once again ... if the figures were good, why don't we have them? Most other shows release the figures if they were good.

    Indeed. I feel the need to point out that that argument in that thread seems to boil down to "I didn't see any mainstream media articles reporting on a drop in viewing figures, therefore there was no problem". Where's the answer to the question from before? Why do you need a mainstream media outlet to tell you that a big drop in viewers is bad?

    That goes out to everyone, actually. How is the argument "I did not see newspapers reporting it, therefore it did not happen!" valid? Very curious, since when I attempt to use the similar point of "I did not see any DVD sales indicating a roaring sales success, therefore it did not happen", I get told I'm an idiot and a smeghead and everything under the sun. Double standards, hm?

     
  16. ori-STUDFARM

    ori-STUDFARM Supply Officer

    Messages:
    833
    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Location:
    Nottingham United Kingdom
    Some people just hear what they want to hear and only address a few of the arguments that go against their own opinion. Choosing, instead, to ignore the other valid responses that totally show them up to being a complete and utter t**t!! He's getting a kick out of this. He has to be! He's enjoying getting a rise out of people. Nobody can be so idiotic in real life! Surely!

    At the end of the day, the BtE 2009 Easter specials failed on so many levels that it got a whole new series commissioned. Just for being so s***!!! Now thats the kind of failure I could do with in my life!!:?::?::?::?::?:
     
  17. Murray

    Murray Second Technician

    Messages:
    67
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    The link the original poster was posting to is to a Sci-Fi and Fantasy Chart, not an overall one. As I said: Number 16 according to the link posted.

    Sorry, you've taken that quote completely out of context. Please quote the original paragraph in full, and then post a response to it ... you're responding to an argument I haven't made, which is impossible to defend myself against. And what makes it rather annoying is that your post is immediately followed by this one:

    Trolling a viewpoint you don't agree with is just childish. jmc2000 manages to come up with perfectly intelligent and civil answers despite disagreeing with me, as I do to him. The only person showing themselves up is you, my friend.

    I did. That was the point of the original paragraph, of which you focused on half a line.

    Now it's my turn. There's only so many times I can say this:
    A "phenomenonal success for Dave" does NOT equal a success for Red Dwarf. I posted this point quite well. Rather irritating to have it ignored in favour of three paragraphs of response to a point which nobody made.

    Dragging down Red Dwarf to the standards of success to Dave is dragging down Red Dwarf itself. Back To Earth proved this: a roaring success in terms of Dave's normal viewing figures, a total flop in terms of Red Dwarf's standards. I have no beef with it being broadcast on a digital channel. I have beef with the fact that the standards for the show's quality are so obviously lowered as a result. If people want to bury their heads in the sand about that for their desire to see more Dwarf, even if its terrible Dwarf (and I find it curious that you yourself would extract viewing pleasure from something you admit yourself to be substandard, as Series 8 was), then there's really nothing I can do about that. Doesn't stop it being the truth, though.

    No other show seems to feel the need to zombify itself in such a manner. It disappoints me that Red Dwarf would. Sad day for British comedy.
     
  18. Murray

    Murray Second Technician

    Messages:
    67
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Yes it is. Basing any argument on DVD sales figures in this instance is flawed, since we can't get accurate figures.

    Rather makes me peeved with the guy who brought them up in the first place, quoting their success as a reason BTE was a success.
     
  19. SoundableObject

    SoundableObject Catering Officer

    Messages:
    273
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool England
    *Advertisement*

    Sick of a troll? Bored of the same repetitive argument? Getting dragged into a debate with a lemon?

    There has never been a better time to leave a thread that is blatantly surrounding around a person who has a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept of the "opinion".

    That is why SoundableObject Industries in conjunction with Grant Naylor Productions have now made the EXIT button.

    The EXIT button is free and tailored exactly to the users specifications.

    So come on, join the revolution and EXIT!

    *Advertisement*


    Normal thread service will now resume.
     
  20. SoundableObject

    SoundableObject Catering Officer

    Messages:
    273
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool England
    Troll: All Red Dwarf fans hate BTE
    Me: I am a Red Dwarf fan and I like BTE
    Troll: All TRUE Red Dwarf fans hate BTE
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page