Red Dwarf: Help Me!

CraigF · 01-08-2006, 11:03 PM

Two things first. Red Dwarf is very expensive here, even in the context of generally expensive BBC shows. I (blind) bought Red Dwarf seasons 1 & 2 in a package years ago, and I thought it was the worst TV show I'd ever seen, a real effort to finish.

However, I thought it had real potential, and I really liked the premise. I am suspecting many did, not the least important being the BBC who continued it for years. So, can someone please give me an unbiased as possible an opinion of how it went after season 2. Or, if I didn't much like the first seasons, am I likely to not "connect" with the rest too? If you felt like me after 1&2 and changed your mind, especially appreciated to know how/why you changed your attitude. Thanks.

Mikel_Cooperman · 01-09-2006, 12:27 AM

I liked the show from the start but I Do thing it got getter as it went on. that is until Rimmer left.

David Williams · 01-09-2006, 02:00 AM

The show gets better the more money the Beeb throws at it, up to a certain point. Series 3 saw the introduction of Kryten as a permanent character (played by a different actor who is less nebbishy). Then the holy grail of character dynamics is created in the foursome of The Cat, Kryten, Rimmer and Lister. The way they play off each other is amazing. I think S4 had the largest number of winning episodes, particularly White Hole and Meltdown (Winnie the Pooh + firing squad = comedic genius). I've found the latest series, S8, to be disappointing after the really great S7 (Jane Austen World rocks!) S6 was my introduction to the show and still my favorite (though my fav ep remains White Hole).

andrew markworthy · 01-09-2006, 02:44 AM

Craig, I had a similar experience to you in that I thought series 1 and 2 sucked big time when I first saw them. I only started re-watching it when the foursome David describes came into being and then I loved it and really got into it. It is generally reckoned by RD fans (and I agree) that series 4,5, and 6 are the best ones. Having said that, once you have got into 4-6, series 1 and 2 suddenly appear a lot better for some reason.

I would personally recommend starting with series 4, working through to series 6. If you like those, then try series 3, then 1 and 2 again, and only at the end try series 7 and 8.

Series 7 and 8 are a bit of an oddity. To explain the background to this, things were going really well at the end of series 6. Then several things changed:

(1) Craig Charles (who plays Lister) was arrested on a rape charge. Ultimately he was found not guilty (I *think* the case was dismissed before it even reached court, but I may be wrong), but whilst he was under suspicion, for obvious reasons the show was put on hold.

(2) When the show restarted, Chris Barrie (who plays Rimmer) was enjoying success in another comedy called the Brittas Empire, and he wanted out. Therefore, Rimmer is not in many of the episodes, and the series lost a key component.

(3) The first six series were written primarily by Rob Grant and Doug Naylor. Rob Grant dropped out in series 7, leaving Naylor to do most of the writing alone for the last two series.

(4) *POSSIBLE SPOILER* To compensate for the sporadic appearance of Rimmer, another character was needed, and so Kochanski was brought into the cast from an alternate dimension and played by a different actress from the earlier series (just don't ask). I think it's fair to say that the fans' response to this was mixed ...

(5) To some people (myself included) who plays Holly is of importance. I have a personal aversion to Norman Lovett playing the role (don't get me wrong, I'm sure he's a great guy, but I just don't like his portrayal in RD). Norman Lovett plays Holly in Series 1 and - you've guessed it - series 7 and 8.

(6) The plots in series 7 and 8 took a radically different turn and they lack the familiar feel of the earlier series.

CraigF · 01-09-2006, 03:31 AM

Thanks. Here's what I've got: must watch series 4 - 6. Series 7 is a toss-up. I can skip series 3 and 8 without losing sleep, least at this point. Then go back to 1 and 2 (which wouldn't hurt since it's been a couple years even now).

Not a problem. Seinfeld took 3-4 seasons (depending who tells it, Seinfeld or us) to hit a stride, though I liked it from episode 1.

It is interesting to me how major characters can just drop out of popular BBC series ("Jeff" in Coupling comes to mind) mid-stream sort of. They sure don't bind them for years the way American TV networks do. You practically have to die to get out of one of those if they want you. TV actors and creators have a lot more freedom in the UK, it seems, but I also suspect they don't make the $$$$ like in the U.S., the trade-off.

**HTF Ads**

andrew markworthy · 01-09-2006, 06:33 AM

Quote:

TV actors and creators have a lot more freedom in the UK, it seems, but I also suspect they don't make the $$$$ like in the U.S., the trade-off.

Yes, that's just about it. Having said that, the majority of situation comedies keep the same actors throughout. Also, appearing on one comedy does not typecast you in the way that it seems to be in the USA. So the same actors can appear over the years in a considerable variety of other comedy shows that aren't spin-offs (the spin-off is a fairly rare thing on Brit TV).

Quote:

You practically have to die to get out of one of those

Curiously enough, on some long-running UK comedy shows, this was literally the case. A macabre joke about Dad's Army (hugely popular show in Britain about WWII elderly volunteers for a type of militia defence force, and largely played by elderly actors) was to watch an early episode and guess the chronological order in which the actors playing the main characters died. In another instance, Last of the Summer Wine (about three elderly men finding insane things to do in Yorkshire) continued until the actor playing one of the pivotal characters died of old age. Remarkably, given that the programme started off with fairly elderly actors, Last of the Summer Wine was one of the longest-running (and possibly the longest-running) comedy programme ever, lasting over twenty years.

Malcolm Cleugh · 01-09-2006, 08:33 AM

One of the things which amazes me with Red Dwarf is the quality of the extras. These have to be the most detailed of any TV series (even beats the Doctor Who ones).
They include very long (over 1 hour) making of for each series. What I love is the honesty, they dont brush over creative differences and cast and production changes.

In terms of the episodes would agree with comments above S1 to 6 are best. Have only bought S7 and preordered S8 as completist and want all of them.

Interesting point on UK TV series is the cast changes. This is because I guess compared to US actors they are lower paid and the TV channels (BBC especially) dont usually tie up cast on long term deals. Once a series is successful many actors in the UK seem to want to make "movies in Hollywood" (as they probably perceive this as more glamorous and higher paid if they "make it"). This is especially true of actresses as younger male British actors are less in demand unless they play villans, whereas there always seems to be demand for younger female British actresses.
The current TV series which most annoys me with constant cast changes is Spooks (US title MI5) where the lead actors change at a regular rate.

Jason Seaver · 01-09-2006, 08:52 AM

I'll offer a somewhat dissenting viewpoint: I think the first two series were among the series very best, with darker humor and the very freaky sense that Lister and company are alone in the universe. Series three and four aren't bad, but they're very different in tone, more a funny sci-fi adventure series than a comedy set against a sci-fi backdrop. Five through seven have their moments, but by the end of S7, I was absolutely ready for the re-invention of the series that "Nanarchy" and #8 provided. Oh, and I loved Norman Lovett as Holly.

It is interesting to see how often this show re-invented itself, despite having mostly the same cast. If you don't like the first two, it's worth it to give #3 a try, not so much because it's better, but because it's a different take on the idea.

PhilipG · 01-09-2006, 09:16 AM

Jason Seaver - snap! I agree entirely.