Slashdot Mirror
New Red Dwarf Series Threatened By the Twitter Era
An anonymous reader writes "The announcement that the new series of Red Dwarf is likely to be shot in front of a studio audience, which hasn't happened for the show since 1998, has made one of the show's actors wary of the practicality of it. Commenting on his blog, Robert Llewellyn, who plays servile robot Kryten in the hit British SF comedy show notes: 'The fear among the producers now is that it's impossible to imagine an audience of around 400 people at the recording of a TV show like Red Dwarf, where nobody does a bit of a hint on Twitter, or sneaks a picture on Facebook or posts a bit of badly shot video on YouTube.'"
This is why we can't have nice things.
Would it be plausible to record in a Faraday Cage or equivalent, negating both cell phone and internet device access for the duration of the recording?
I can understand the appeal of actors being able to react subtly to the audience - but I always found the blurts of audience sounds annoying - ESPECIALLY in shows with canned laughter or artificially "enhanced" audience reactions.
Red Dwarf seems like it would be better with a smaller audience of insiders anyway - comedians playing to other comedians are always filthier, funnier, and less self-censoring, and I think that would be a better result.
Ryan Fenton
All Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube posts will do is generate extra hype for the show at no extra cost to the producers. No one is going to watch a shitty YouTube cell phone capture instead of the actual show. Free advertising is always good and word of mouth is extremely valuable. If someone sees a commercial for a TV show they just file that away with all the other advertising they ignore. If they get the pitch from someone they know or better someone with similar interests they're way more likely to pay attention. If I was making a TV show I'd beg my audience to talk about it on every channel they had available.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
I am very cross. You shouldn't have run away from me. What are we going to do with those twitter posters?
I have an idea, but who would clean up the mess?
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
Red Dwarf is a classic Sci Fi series and something I grew up on and still enjoy today, but it is clearly a series that doesn't work any more. They tried to revive it before when they did a mini series and it was by far the worst episode(s) of the entire thing.
People always cry for remakes and updated versions of older TV series, but some things just don't work in the current climate. Doctor Who is a prime example of a TV series that doesn't work in the modern climate, so when it was brought back it was massively retoned to suit modern TV. But Red Dwarf can't be retoned, when they tried it, it just didn't work. Some times you just need a budget of £10 an episode and a dude wearing a spandex suit rather than massive CGI scenes and unlimited funds.
Red Dwarf is an all time classic and something I hope anything I spawn will get to watch and enjoy as I did, but it feels like the actors have no careers any more (especially Craig Charles, who is now badly dubbing Japanese game shows for cable channels) and just want to milk sucess 30 years ago.
I like muppets.
The WWF (now WWE) has had to deal with this for ages, as their shows are often broadcast days after they're actually performed.
Their solution? Do jack shit.
The fans who don't want to be spoiled, don't look up the spoilers.
The fans who do, do.
Nobody really loses out unless someone on the cast has an unexplained need for secrecy. This isn't Survivor.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Pretty sure they're more worried about spoilers.
They could always just fill the seats with robots.
Then at the flip of an executive-controlled switch, they could all burst into cold, robotic laughter. Even better, special appearances from Robot Wars contestants could make their way into the program to give the audience something to relate to. Kryten might even end up the next Justin Bieber.
sometimes it's hard to avoid spoilers, especially when perusing other info related to the franchise, the kind of stuff that big fans would care to look at.
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
How about, I don't know, getting rid of one of the single most annoying thing about British comedies. The damn studio audience. I swear they bus in the most idiotic people around for them. I've heard the people involved with I.T. Crowd mentioning that they have to give a lecture to the audience to try not laughing at anything too dumb. In particular I remember hearing someone mention being exasperated because the audience would laugh at toilets. Not doing anything with a toilet, just, apparently, the fact that a toilet could exist.
Everything will be taken away from you.
Big deal, think of it as pre-release publicity, for free. As long as you have an audience there will be leaks.
As to the show itself, even though I thought the old cast was fantastic, go for a new one. Obviously base it on the original British version, not that horrible American version that never got released.
And as a small note, even though I loved the show, that last thing they did,"Back to Earth", was horrible and should be forgotten with as much prejudice as possible.
Anyone who watches Red Dwarf for the plot is missing the point. It's like watching Twilight for the sex. All that can really get out of a pre-screener like this are a few good jokes, which should hopefully convince the potential viewer to tune in anyway.
Movies have dealt with this for years. It's called Some-Of-Your-Audience-Sees-It-Before-The-Rest. Movies are still good movies. Red Dwarf will survive.
The ______ Agenda
of course, Red Dwarf is a TV show and not a band, but I'm sure you wanted to point out something really interesting with your comparison.
"DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
"Some-Of-Your-Audience-Sees-It-Before-The-Rest"
The point they're making is that there is a vast difference between 'Some" and "Most". It is possible to send footage, commentary almost instantly to hundreds of thousands of people in this modern world. This wasn't the case 10-15 years ago.
Maybe this is the reason modern TV series filmed in front of audiences are so bland, is because if there were any twists some dickhead will always feel the need to shout it to the world through the many social media options available to them.
Personally I've never understood (and never cared enough, really) why TV magazines insist on telling the reader what is due to take place in their soap of choice over the coming week.
Are people really unable to WAIT for anything any more? What is the achievement to be made from demonstrating that you know what happens in a TV programme, film or game?
Except that the perceived downfall of Red Dwarf ties in with the omission of the studio audience.
It has long been touted by comedy writers such as Richard Curtis (Blackadder) that a studio audience gives them a very solid gauge of what is working and gives them feedback on how things could be done better.
Plus, news that "there will be a new series of Red Dwarf" is one for the TV websites. A story on a technology site about concerns about social media accessibility and it's effect on TV series production is totally appropriate in my view.
You WATCHED twilight? seriously?
He's a likeable chap, but not the sharpest droid in the box. To wit, he's rabidly in favour of electric vehicles, to the point where he accuses anyone pointing out the obvious flaws with current vehicles - production costs, bad and reducing range, battery recycling issues, and that the vast majority of the electricity still comes from fossil source - as being biased shills.
So, well intentioned fellow, but rather superficial in the thinking department.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
And yet The IT Crowd somehow manages to survive being shot in front of an audience of geeks.
The types of people that will read about the episodes on twitter or watch terrible videos from the audiance on youtube are the same types of people that will watch an episode 15x so they can come to work and annoy me with sad quotes. Then they'll buy your show on DVD, the "Editors edition" DVD, the "Extended cuts" DVD and then the box set.
Use that to create buzz and get people more excited about the whole thing.
Yet another example of someone not getting the Internet. Nothing to see here, move along.
That was pretty much my first thought, too. Why should I want to read spoilers if I follow a show? Sure, I want to know how it continues, how that cliffhanger resolves, but I want to see it unfold.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If they are so concerned about Spoilers, then why not do it as live television in front of a live audience? Or are modern series so stuck on special effects and multiple takes, that this can't be done like a stage play or vaudeville? Gee, it might even be "different."
I'm afraid, as a Brit, I am now legally required to murder you.
1) For liking Monty Python after the 70's have passed.
2) For linking Monty Python to English humour.
3) For thinking that any modern UK comedy show follows Monty Python.
Monty Python was "funny" in the 70's because it was outrageous. Their three worst sketches were the most outrageous and the ones that everyone remembers. 99% of what they produced was absolute shite. They are not, in and of themselves, funny any more anyway. The films? Pah. Basically designed to be outrageous / controversial with a few good lines thrown in. Follow the example of XKCD who understand this: http://xkcd.com/16/ Anyone caught with the words "Ni", "Very Naughty Boy" or "It's dead" should be shot on sight - it's like schoolkids that think they're cool because they have a designer jacket that ALL the schoolkids are wearing. Few UK people remember MP, fewer discuss them out of anything more than nostalgia, and even fewer think they are "English" humour.
What you fail to miss is that Monty Python is the exact OPPOSITE of the proper English humour. That's why it was funny at the time. Proper English comedy has nobody doing weird things. It's mostly sitcoms or standup in perfectly ordinary scenarios (e.g. a shopkeeper in a shop, a market trader on a stall, etc.). If it's "surreal", chances are it comes from the crap, outrageous side of English humour (e.g. Little Britain, etc.). However, things like Red Dwarf, Blackadder (Series 2 onwards), Only Fools & Horses (historically, but too many re-runs), etc. are funny not because of the situation, or because of slapstick, or because of "weird stuff" - the comedy is mostly background and almost all of it in simple dialogue between two people. A "newer" example would be Not Going Out with Lee Mack and Tim Vine but you'd have to watch several series to get into it, especially if you have trouble with the accents. It can't be written down or recited or told to people, because it's about inflection, and facial expression, and intangible stuff, but if it is funny to someone it's because they've SEEN it and are reminded of their reaction to it at the time. It's as much the comedian delivering the line as the comedy itself - this is why Rowan Atkinson is a comedy genius and Michael Palin (despite being in the original Monty Python line-up) films documentaries about travel. John Cleese *can* "get it", especially now, but it's more Bond-film-style humour in his case, not one-man-on-his-own.
Any fan of British comedy will instantly recognise things like these clips below but they are ONLY funny if you've actually seen the joke, delivered first in its original form, in its entirety, beforehand:
Red Dwarf, while on "Blue Alert": "Red alert sir? Are you entirely sure? It does mean changing the bulb."
Only Fools and Horses (while picking up girls in a bar): "You've got to impress 'em, talk about money" , "Yeah? I found one of those old five-pound notes the other day."
The Two Ronnies: "Four candles?" "There you are: four candles." "No, no, no, FOUR CANDLES" "Well, there you are, four candles." "NO, handles for forks."
Otherwise, it's just a bad Christmas-cracker joke.
Chances are, as a "yank", you've probably never seen anything truly British and actually funny, because you don't import them (only the crap). The US pilot of Red Dwarf was a travesty because the US networks wanted so many changes it wasn't funny any more - seriously go hunt down one episode of Red Dwarf and the US pilot and then watch them one after another - and that was AFTER a revolt including script re-write by the only original cast member to still be involved in the US pilot by that point.
You also need to give anything funny at least 4 episodes of your time. It takes me that long to "get" things like Friends, or Frasier (yuck!), or Just Shoot Me, or Ally McBeal (and you accuse us of weird stuff?) or anything else that's ever been available over here and
Honestly, surely it can't just be me who thought the audience laughter canned or not was the worst thing about Red Dwarf by far.
Shoot it without an audience, and don't add any recorded laughter either.
Solves both problems.
Centre of galaxy, "finding God" (really trapped being, revealed to be an exiled Q in books (as is the entity past the galactic barrier, and why there's a barrier in the first place...)
It was pretty damn terrible.
The people watching are fans the people seeking out the sneak peeks, virals, bloopers, etc are also fans. Its not like they are going to loose anything by letting this stuff get out. Most fan sites are good about hiding "spoilers" for those that don't want to know..and for those that do all it does is generate hype and buzz...which usually is something niche programming clamors for.
I'm afraid, as a Brit, I find your post to be such an embarrassment to our nation that I must ask you go into a quiet room with a bottle of whiskey and a revolver, and do the right thing.
Surreal and nonsensical humour requires that you enjoy the "different", are not so concerned with what is "proper", and don't need at least 4 episodes of preparatory material before you can "get" the joke. Don't criticise what you can't understand. Let's take a brief tour of exaggeration, silliness, farce and slapstick in British comedy:
18th century: Jonathan Swift writes about midgets and giants to satirise the pomposity of Brits obsessed with what is "proper".
19th century: Gilbert & Sullivan based entire plots on ideas like a fully grown pirate being only 5 years old, having been born on Feb 29th.
20th century: in the 50s, The Goon Show goes surreal, blazing the path 18 years before Python. Spike Milligan is famous both for being surreal and for writing funny books which do not need to be acted out to be funny, and Peter Sellers is famous for his over-the-top characters. The Two Ronnies relied upon "stupid costumes, over-exaggerated characters [and] nonsensical situations" for 16 years. Eric Morecambe, also drawing in many millions of viewers with Ernie Wise for 15 years, was famous for slapstick.
We're now in the 21st century. We still have several of The Goodies, another surreal 70s show, as regulars on I'm Sorry, I Haven't A Clue in its 54th series, with guests such as the ridiculous and surreal Ross Noble. How much more bloody "proper" and "English" can you get than Radio Four on a Sunday afternoon?
It's about time to get down from your ivory high chair and catch up with the past few centuries of what us Brits think is funny. Don't be the guy giving the rest of us a reputation for having a stick up our arse.