Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Blake's 7 Remake In the Works

Soulskill posted more than 6 years ago | from the polishing-old-gems dept.

Sci-Fi 212

bowman9991 writes "Remember the BBC's Blake's 7? Looks like the classic space adventure series is being reworked by Sky One. If they get it right (like the recent Battlestar Galactica revamp), this one has massive potential. 'As part of a drive to invest more in homegrown drama, Sky One has ordered scripts for two 60-minute pilot episodes. If successful, it will be expanded into a six-part series.' Created by Terry Nation, the man responsible for the Daleks in Doctor Who, Blake's 7 ran from 1978 to 1981 and had cult appeal. The effects were average, but the story and characters were compelling."

cancel ×

212 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

can hardly wait (2, Interesting)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 6 years ago | (#23213886)

IIRC for most of the series there was only five of them, and none of them was Blake. Cervelat the villainess was hot though.

It's Servalan (4, Funny)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 6 years ago | (#23213910)

And she'd have you killed for that.

Re:It's Servalan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23214144)

As a spotty teeneager when it was on the BBC I have to say that I wanked myself sore at the thought of being humiliated and disciplined by Servalan. She was the woman who started my lifelong interest in female dominatrices.

Tony Blair

Re:can hardly wait (2)

shogun (657) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214036)

IIRC for most of the series there was only five of them, and none of them was Blake. Cervelat the villainess was hot though.
From wiki [wikipedia.org] : Cervelat, also spelled cervelas, servelat or zervelat, is a type of cooked sausage produced mainly in Switzerland and in parts of Germany. In its modern Swiss variety, it consists of a mixture of beef, bacon and pork rind that is packed into zebu intestines, slightly smoked and then boiled.

I'm sure there a joke in your sausage appreciation somewhere...

Re:can hardly wait (4, Informative)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214066)

That's Servalan [wikipedia.org] .

Stationed in the UK (2, Interesting)

WED Fan (911325) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214354)

I was stationed in the UK with the USAF and caught the last 2 seasons of B7. I loved it. Sure, the production value wasn't great, but I loved the dark characters, especially Darrow's Avon. These weren't the clean white knights of some quest, these were the gritty, angst riddent, heavily flawed humans. There were no clearly the white knight hero, but there was clearly one single evil, Servilan. God, for the longest time, anyone mentioned "clip haired bitch" I would picture her.

When the show ended with the dreamscape shoot out, I was among the thousands that sent in a plea to continue the show. Even offering a way out of the apparent slaughter of all the crew.

Now, I appreciate the killing off of major characters for the sake of the story. Love "MI-5" ("Spooks"), "Life on Mars" (oh, isn't there a 80's follow on to "Life on Mars"?), and "Torchwood". But, can't stand the new "Robin Hood" with ninjas, an arab female version of Wesley Crusher, and way too much modern crud.

Re:Stationed in the UK (2, Informative)

WED Fan (911325) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214540)

Oh, have to mention something from when I was in Japan in the mid-70's that ties in with B7.

Most outdoor battles done on B7 and Japanese hero shows, Kamen Rider, Rainbow Man, Diamond Eye, etc, were filmed in quarries. Need a place where you can set off explosions, a quarry is a great place. Some were jarring, our heros are in a park or on a beach, then suddenly bad guys show up and we're in a quarry.

Of course, you knew when our heroes were walking through piles of rock the shooting was going to start soon.

I took a tour of Toho Studios in '76 and saw the very short suit for Godzilla, one of the Ultraman suits, and saw the filming of a samurai movie. The production value of a lot of the Toho TV stuff was like the BBC's.

Re:Stationed in the UK (3, Informative)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214606)

B7 did a fair bit of shooting in nuclear power stations and oil refineries.

Obviously there's only so far you can go with the explosion effects in such places though :p

Ashes to Ashes; and its bad (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23215002)

The 80s follow-up to Life on Mars is Ashes to Ashes and it is bad.
1) The main character (female John Simms replacement) is unlikable. Not a bang on the actor but the writers.
2) Gene Hunt et al are given too many hero shots. Long pauses while they strike a pose and music plays for them. It turns what was believable and enjoyable in LoM into a parody.
3) The ambiguity is gone. In LoM was he dead, coma, actual time travel? In AtA, there is no mystery. So, one of the dimensions of LoM is instantly gone.

As for B7, I agree Avon was the best part of the show. I got the DVDs a few years ago but the show had aged so badly I couldn`t make it through the first season. I assume the remake will be like most new SciFi remakes. The producer will have a political agenda to push that will distract and undermine the show.

No Paul Darrow (Avon) - I won't watch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23215574)

nobody, but NOBODY can replace that voice. As iconic a voice as Tom Baker. I'd rather see the original "remastered" with digital effects that loose Paul Darrow.

Re:Stationed in the UK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23215228)

There is an 80's follow on to Life on Mars - it's called Ashes to Ashes and IMHO it's vastly inferior.

Re:Stationed in the UK (1)

OriginalArlen (726444) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215548)

Has there ever been another TV show (in any genre) that ended unexpectedly with the villain getting all six main "goodies", plus the eponymous hero, shot dead in the last 30 seconds of the last show? That ending was absolutely extraordinary.

Re:Stationed in the UK (1)

WED Fan (911325) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215672)

Has there ever been another TV show (in any genre) that ended unexpectedly with the villain getting all six main "goodies", plus the eponymous hero, shot dead in the last 30 seconds of the last show? That ending was absolutely extraordinary.

And, because it wasn't that well known in the U.S., more than a few number of geeks thought they were being terribly original by choosing "ORAC" as part of their screen/hacker/account names.

Re:can hardly wait (1)

hughk (248126) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215054)

Her name was Servalan, played by the Jacqueline Pearce. If you want to see more, she also appeared in the film "White Mischief", topless.

Re:can hardly wait (1)

Cally (10873) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215186)

Blake disappeared between series 2 and 3 (of four.) Several other members of the crew had "rotated out" (Gan got a rock on the head, my eponymous first crush died in an exploding sabotaged underground bunker.

CervalaN, the chief villain, was "just" a superb S&M Dominatrix-stroke-polician; in the last two series, she's backstabbed and betrayed her way to the position of Supreme Commander (a job title she pronounced with lip-curling and lacivious precision... though I didn't quite get it at the time. I was 8 when the first series was shown, and I remember my father dubbed her "Mrs Thatcher Syndrome". Years later a survey of the generation of boys who were 13-14 in 1977-81 "revealed" that Cervelan was their favourite masturbatory fantasy; the actress who played to role has said that this is the best accolade of her career. Now Cally... Cally was GEEK sexy, and probably my first ever crush. It's the combination of vulnerability with enormous strength of character (and being a hardened revolutionary killer, of course :) ) Her death was probably the first time a TV show had really shaken my core assumptions about how the world worked. (The idea that you could kill off one of your main characters, and a "goodie" at that, was pretty earth-shaking!)

Re:can hardly wait (5, Informative)

imipak (254310) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215428)

Two great things about B7:
  • (1) (a) In Star Trek, the galaxy is ruled by the Federation, a benevolent democratic agglomeration of worlds united for the common good. The protagonists are the crew of a Federation starship; although there's enough conflict to generate drama (plot), they are normally function as a well-oiled unit, with everyone committed to working alongside their crew mates to, generally, Do Good. (ISTR Gene Roddenberry saying something about wanting to show liberal democracy as a benevolent force for good - I'm sure ST fans out there can quote me chapter and verse or correct me. Whether it was intentional or not, the Enterprise is a clear metaphor for American geopolitical values and objectives in the 60s, or at any rate for the high school textbook version of same at any rate.)
  • (1) (b): In Blake's 7, the galaxy is ruled by the Federation, a authoritarian, semi-fascistic state with heavy Orwellian overtones of manipulation of the masses by propaganda and brainwashing technologies of various types. The agglomerate many worlds for colonial purposes; many planets are Occupied by the Federation whilst they are stripped of their resources, often by enslaving the local population. The protagonists are the crew of a spacecraft who all have their own agendas, but chiefly thrown together because they escaped from the same prison ship. Whilst Blake is a committed freedom fighter type, and attacking and destroying the Federation is their chief goal, several of the crew were imprisoned for non-political crimes. (Avon and Vila, computer fraudster and lockpick respectively, in particular.) The crew barely hold together at times, with Avon in particular openly plotting to leave Blake at various times. And who can forget Avon preparing to throw Vila out of an airlock to lighten an overloading ship?) The tensions amongst the crew, of which this is only the most obvious, are the motor that drives much of the dramatic tension.
  • (2) -- all the technology! The cardboard sets and props were totally believable at the time, most of the time (there were some stunningly lame "view out of a porthole" effects, and the supposedly computer-generated animations of things like scanner plots were completely lacking stuff that would be essential these days, like spurious data readouts and vernier markings, blinking alerts, etc. But this was before the days of mass-market GUIs, remember; it was only a year since the wooden mouth demo at PARC, IIRC. But the great thing about the tech was that it was almost never gratuitous; it served plot and/or character, sometimes in amazingly imaginative and ideas-based manner. Witness Vila's lock-picking tools, Cally's personal digital music player (in 1978!), Travis' James Bond hand (character devices); teleport - ok not original, but a fundamental plot device in many episodes (Avon getting himself captured, and holding out against torture until he's referred up to the Chief LaserProbe Merchant - at which point he triggers a beacon, and the crew teleport into the torture cell and kidnap the head torturer; and dare I mention IMIPAK, a gun which has no effect at all on the person shot (who may not even notice if they're not looking), until the user uses a remote control device to trigger the irradiated victim, who then curls up and disappears in a puff of bad light (or something - the nature of how the thing actually kills them is never described, because it's the McGuffin-like usefulness to the plot of having the audience knowing who's marked for death and who isn't, etc etc. Just to name one, at the start of series 3 Avon is stuck on a beach on a remote planet, with the empty Liberator in orbit but uncrewed. He has Orac with him though (luggable supercomputer, which incidentally is a quantum computer although the term hadn't been coined then AFAIK!) Avon fires up Orac, uses it's long range comms to log into Zen, the Liberator's shipboard computer, and command it remotely to teleport him back on board. ISTR that there is mention of Orac's using encrypted communication protocols as well, so as far as I'm concerned that the first appearance of Ssh.

Re:can hardly wait (2, Funny)

OriginalArlen (726444) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215522)

I must say the practice of picking your Slashdot username from cheesy British science fiction TV of the 70s is totally lame, and betrays a pathetic obsession with nostalgia at the expense of personal development.

Also, Arlen was by far the sexiest female character in the whole show. A lot of women on the B7 slash fanfic list I accidentally ended up subscribed to for a while had different ideas about the most attractive characters on the show, though. Not to mention leather trousers...

Re:can hardly wait (1)

Peet42 (904274) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215636)

IIRC for most of the series there was only five of them


They counted the two computers too. (Aurac and Zen)

I still love the way they introduced the "ding-dong" teleport bracelets, then strung us along for almost a whole series before using the immortal line "[Ding-Dong] Avon calling". (v.funny British advertising slogan reference...)

There were always 7. (1)

techno-vampire (666512) | more than 6 years ago | (#23216028)

There were always seven on the "good guys" team. However, you sometimes had to count the AI running the Liberator and/or the obnoxiously arrogant computer they stole and put to use. One way or another, there were always 7.

The effects were 'average'? (2, Informative)

damburger (981828) | more than 6 years ago | (#23213892)

That is being quite kind if I remember Blake's 7 correctly (unless NASA have suddenly discovered that cardboard is a really good material to make spacecraft out of)

Re:The effects were 'average'? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23213950)

Lets not also forget, the "futuristic" kill-o-zap rayguns (actually toy guns purchased from some shop somewhere).
Still, I always had a bit of a soft spot for the Liberator design..don't arsk, a wasted youth reading space-opera &etc warps one's sensibilities..
 

Re:The effects were 'average'? (1, Interesting)

damburger (981828) | more than 6 years ago | (#23213992)

Yeah, it did look pretty cool. I just hope they don't do what they've done with Doctor Who, try and upgrade the special effects and some of the original character of the series. New Doctor Who is very hit and miss, depending on who writes a particular episode, and reeks of just trying to hard.

The fact is, UK productions will never be able to match the budget of US productions so we can't expect to produce the same standard of special effects. Trying to inevitably fails and, to make things worse, usually causes the story, character and humour to suffer.

This is apparent to me every Sunday morning, when I watch Doctor Who on iPlayer back to back with a torrented episode of Battlestar Galactica. Makes me wonder why so many Americans love Doctor Who.

Re:The effects were 'average'? (2, Insightful)

LurkerXXX (667952) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214140)

I'm not sure what your complaint about the current Dr. Who special affects are. They are quite decent. Not to the level of a Hollywood movie, but quite decent for current TV budget sci-fi. They are definitley not to the level of Battlestar, but that's really high-end compared to about anything else you will see on TV instead of the big screen. They are much more on-par with U.S. efforts than the old days of Blake's 7.

I'm an American who loves Dr. Who, and I'm very excited to hear about a possible return of Blake's 7. Maybe because that's because I grew up watching Captain Kirk throwing styrofoam boulders at aliens. Cheesy special effects don't bother me if the script and characters are worth watching.

Re:The effects were 'average'? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23214322)

> Cheesy special effects don't bother me if the script and characters are worth watching.

That's what made it good, it was it experimental drama at the time and I think the BBC gave the crew a long leash to play about. An interesting programme partly because of the story of Blake which had to written around real life events. Gareth Thomas was an actor from the RSC (same schooling as Patrick Stewart - and my cousin knew him enough to nod to). AFAIK, though this may be rubbish, the story was something like Gareth did the pilot/first episode then fell out with the writers, didn't like the story/scripts or whatever. He came back at the end to do the final episode.

The characters (not the actors) hated one another. And several new actors joined/left in the short run.

There were no heros in Blakes 7. Everyone was faulted and mostly they were nasty people.

It's a story of criminals, theives, terrorists and a fascict Federation. Possibly inspired by Lucas' Empire in Star Wars.

Even Blake, the heroic namesake eventually sells out the crew.

There's a conspicuous absence of moralising in it - complete opposite of Star Trek

They had a lot of derivative plot devices and were obviously sci-fi geeks who understood the genre history, like the interracial kiss (Trekies will understand the significance of this) which they actually made quite sexy.

There were some original ideas. Teleport bracelets seemed a nice plausible device and added some script potential.

As mentioned above, the Liberator design was really something cool.

I hope Sky don't massacre it. As an old sci-fi nerd who watched them all I expect something along the lines of The Sopranos in space if they are to do it well and grasp the original ethos.

Re:The effects were 'average'? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23214154)

The writing of british sci-fi series(in general, BSG is better, but getting worse, while Dr.Who has been hit or miss almost from the start) just blows out of the water most anything written in the states since X-Files third season or so, IMHO. I think that's why...

Re:The effects were 'average'? (2, Interesting)

blincoln (592401) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214434)

Makes me wonder why so many Americans love Doctor Who.

I'm American, and I love Doctor Who because of the stories and the quirky British feel of the whole thing. I'm not sure any other culture could have come up with a series that bounces between funny, sad, and surreal constantly throughout an episode and doesn't fall on its face.

There have been one or two episodes I thought were weak, but that's true of any series. I wouldn't complain if the effects were better, but they're not a critical flaw any more than a stage play is critically flawed because the sets aren't good enough to use for a feature film.

Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (4, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 6 years ago | (#23213912)

So I recently was turned on to modern BBC programmes (I'll spell it their way) with much joy resulting from watching The Mighty Boosh ... on YouTube. I realize that this is in all likelihood illegal which is unfortunate because I like to pay credit where credit is due.

I moseyed on over to the BBC website [bbc.co.uk] in hopes of a NBC, ABC or even Comedy Central style of ad based hosting. No luck. I couldn't download and install the iPlayer either. I realized that cost Brits a pretty pound to produce so no hard feelings there. But there wasn't a low quality flash version for me. None. Nothing. I cannot figure out how to enjoy this programme legally.

Their site has two questions in their FAQ in regard to this:

Can I download programmes from outside the UK?

The BBC uses Geo-IP technology to identify where your are based on the location of your internet service provider (ISP). This ensures that only internet users in the UK can enjoy programmes on BBC iPlayer.

If you download a programme to your laptop or a portable hard drive, you can watch this wherever you are in the world. However, you will only be able to download new programmes once you return to the UK.
And

Can I use BBC iPlayer outside the UK?

Rights agreements mean that BBC iPlayer television programmes are only available to users to download or stream (Click to Play) in the UK. However, BBC Worldwide is working on an international version, which we will make available as soon as possible.

Radio programmes are available outside the UK in addition to podcasts at http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/podcasts/directory/ [bbc.co.uk] . ÂMany BBC News programmes are available for viewers outside the UK at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/video_and_audio/default.stm [bbc.co.uk] and BBC Sport highlights are available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport [bbc.co.uk] .

Do make sure you check for news on BBC iPlayer at http://www.bbc.co.uk/ [bbc.co.uk] .
I do hope that changes in the near future. In the meantime, does anyone know the best way to get ahold of episodes of new Dr. Who, The Mighty Boosh & (soon) Blake's 7?

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (1)

vertinox (846076) | more than 6 years ago | (#23213936)

Your best bet would be to find an open proxy in the UK... If one exists.

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23215076)

Your best bet would be to find an open proxy in the UK... If one exists.
And how is this more legal?

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (2, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#23213966)

It's not being made by the BBC, it's being made by Sky, which is part of Murdock's empire and so will, no doubt, be widely distributed to anyone who wants to buy it (unless it's a cable company that competes with Sky).

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214498)

It's not being made by the BBC, it's being made by Sky, which is part of Murdock's empire and so will, no doubt, be widely distributed to anyone who wants to buy it
And, ironically, another example of Murdoch hiding in plain site. Blake's 7 was about rebels fighting an evil empire (as was Firefly also paid for by the Murdoch Empire). The irony being that News Corps International is, in fact, THE contemporary evil empire.

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (1)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214652)

It was an inverted star trek - even the federation logo is a star trek federation logo on its side.

Of course star trek themselves have done basically the same concept in the DS9 parallel universe, so I'm not sure how well it'll work this time around.

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (1)

robably (1044462) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214016)

All three TV series of The Mighty Boosh and the radio series are available on iTunes.

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (1)

mlk (18543) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214054)

Sky not BBC.

Move to the UK, and pay the tax? ;)

BitTorrent, Not sure the Mighty Boosh is on BT, but Dr Who is.

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (1)

christurkel (520220) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214096)

The new Doctor Who is running on Sci-fi Friday at 9pm Eastern. Just started the new season.

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23214104)

Most broadcasters that provide free access to their library online take a similar approach. I can't use NBC's site at all without proxying through a gateway in the US. As for comedy central, I can view old episodes of The Daily Show, but that's about it. BBC World might eventually provide a similar ad-supported service (BBC in the UK is prhibited from using advertising to generate revenue, they're funded by the 'Television Tax' a compulsory annual cost of about £120 , roughly $240 at todays exchange rates). But that'd be limited to programmes already shown on BBC world, which contains a subset of the programmes broadcast int he BBC, and often much later. Annoying, I know; I get most of the shows I watch from news groups. Can anyone comment on the legality of downloading (ie not sharing) from newsgroups?

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (5, Interesting)

Telvin_3d (855514) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214136)

Just so you know, all those NBC and ABC clips you like don't play for people outside of the United States. I'm not sure about the Comedy Central ones. Sometimes they work for me (in Canada) and sometimes not, so I'm not sure if they have sketchy ID technology or a sketchy server streaming the clips.

Same reason as the BBC; they licence by region.

Really, it's a losing battle. Everyone I know who enjoys BBC shows grabs them from torrents as they come out then picks up the DVD sets when they get released. Most of us don't even bother watching the North American broadcast if it even gets one. Not only do they tend to be six months to a year behind but they are also edited. The BBC doesn't have advertisements like our TV does so when they get broadcast over here they have to be cut for time to make more room for the commercials. Also the occasional content or swear word.

For anyone who likes Doctor Who it is particularly bad. They had to cut an entire B plot from last season along with many, many character scenes. It's great on the forums. Every once in a while you get a new poster who can't figure out what the hell everyone else is talking about and it usually comes out that they have only seen the American cut.

All around the world (1)

HalAtWork (926717) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214288)

There ought to be a way to link up all TV stations on the same network, like how all web sites from all over the world are linked on the internet. This way, TV stations can offer their programming and compete internationally. You can subscribe to magazines from around the world, get newspapers from around the world, you can buy books from around the world and see movies from around the world. There's also the internet. It seems all media is internationally available except TV channels and even certain TV programs.

Living in Canada, I would very much like to subscribe to channels such as Nickelodeon, TV Time, Disney Channel, Comedy Central, and Cartoon Network. I don't want Teletoon or any approximations, I don't even want a Canadian branded version or whatever. I want the original with the original programs, because that's the aesthetic that I like, that's the content that I like, and that's the presentation that I like. I know there are certain regulations in regards to how much local content must accompany foreign content, but that's just bullshit. If you want Canada to get some equal funding, then tax the foreign channels or make better programs so people actually want to pay for them and watch them too. But don't limit what I have access to, that's a little fascist for my taste.

On another note, it would even be helpful to get local news broadcast all over the world, it would give people insight and perspective, as well as allow people from abroad to stay more in touch with their roots and their friends and family who they may have left behind.

Re:All around the world (1)

trash eighty (457611) | more than 6 years ago | (#23216150)

Actually a lot of TV channels do broadcast on the web, for free. Do a search, you'll find a lot. Whether you'll find a lot worth watching is another matter and depends on your taste.

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (1)

Galaga88 (148206) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215360)

For anyone who likes Doctor Who it is particularly bad. They had to cut an entire B plot from last season along with many, many character scenes. It's great on the forums. Every once in a while you get a new poster who can't figure out what the hell everyone else is talking about and it usually comes out that they have only seen the American cut.
Curious; which B plot was that? I haven't watched Doctor Who on Sci-Fi since the first half of the first season of the new series.

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (1)

Snaller (147050) | more than 6 years ago | (#23216092)

Yeah, tell me if he tells you :)

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (1)

Neon Aardvark (967388) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214302)

You need to watch Hyperdrive. It's like some kind of cross between Blake 7 and The Mighty Boosh. Sort of.

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23215336)

Sort of, as in, It's more like a poor man's Red Dwarf, or,

Red Dwarf 'reimagined' by some 'clever' Oxbridge types who wouldn't know a joke if it jumped up and performed a prefrontal lobotomy on them using a carrot that had been frozen in liquid helium for a week...gnash chomp snarl.

Hyperdrive is/was/will be god-awful, I tried hard to like it, considering the people behind it also had a hand in Black Books.

But,I couldn't, crap characters, crap stories, crap acting, banal/pedestrian CG, you could see the spoor of a "lets-write-a-sf-comedy-in-space-by-the-numbers-a-wee-bit-like-the-office-as-people-think-thats-funny-and-well-get-paid" thought process going on in the minds of the perpretators.

Someone once said 'just because it's set in a spaceship, and in the future, doesn't mean its science fiction' (or something like that), to this should be added, 'just because something touts itself as a comedy, doesn't mean its funny.'

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (1)

Neon Aardvark (967388) | more than 6 years ago | (#23216114)

Well, taste is subjective - I think it's a great show.

I wouldn't compare it to The Office, which I didn't like, and seemed to be centred on terrible characters unknowningly embarrassing themselves by virtue of their lousy personalities.

It's more about incompetently dealing with events. Events in space.

Yes, it's less joke-centred then Red Dwarf, but then it doesn't have a laughter-track, which is a plus, and has a bit of political satire thrown in (Britain playing second fiddle to the US, etc). Two entirely different, equally entertaining shows, IMO.

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (2, Insightful)

multisync (218450) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214352)

I moseyed on over to the BBC website ... I cannot figure out how to enjoy this programme legally.


This is what the rest of the world experiences when they try to watch shows on the websites of U.S. networks. It's a shame, too, as the alternatives - downloading high-quality torrnets you can watch in your player of choice, for example - is already more attractive than being forced to watch a lower quality stream in an embedded player, complete with commercials. I would truly like to support the producers of these shows (or those who finance their production) but I don't want to compromise on quality, and I don't want to be forced to watch some crappy stream in an embedded player that doesn't work in my browser/operating system of choice.

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23214696)

Re:Good Luck Watching It Outside the UK (1)

Dzimas (547818) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214782)

*does anyone know the best way to get ahold of episodes of new Dr. Who, The Mighty Boosh & (soon) Blake's 7*

I'm guessing you're American, so tune in the the SciFi channel for the new Doctor Who. Grumble and whine at them if they're not offering streaming within the USA (after all, the reason that the BBC doesn't allow international streaming is to protect its international partners, who pay the Beeb for broadcast rights in their region). It's available on DVD as well. As far as the new Blake's 7 goes, it's being produced by Sky - the UK's largest satellite broadcaster - not the BBC. I suspect Sky will partner with the SciFi channel as they have in the past. There. You have lots of legal options.

Average? (3, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#23213930)

Describing the effects as 'average' is a bit of an exaggeration - they were absolutely terrible. Some of the acting was pretty dire too. The really compelling thing about the series was the fact that the characters were believable. Vila, for example, was the archetypal coward and was rewarded for his cowardice by being the only character in all of the episodes, while more aggressive characters tended to die off quite quickly. Blake was on a mission to save everyone, but everyone else was out for themselves. The people behaved like people and the politicians were interested in expanding their own power, rather than acting in the interests of their people (except on Auron, but they all died). It was a refreshing counterpoint to Star Trek.

Re:Average? (3, Insightful)

mpe (36238) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214278)

Describing the effects as 'average' is a bit of an exaggeration - they were absolutely terrible.

Actually the effects were "state of the art". Just that they were nearly 30 years ago.

Re:Average? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23214570)

Nope, sorry, but they *could* manage better SFX 30 years ago, just the budget for Blake's 7 (and Dr Who as well) was so pathetically minimalist, they did their best with limited resources available.
(There was always the fun of spotting which bits of Airfix kit they'd incorporated in the latest spaceships etc)

The eternal problem with the BBC is its attitude to SF, that the buggers in charge at the Beeb never quite did 'get' SF...but are more than happy to rake in the monies from the sales of these programs.

Regarding the current Dr. Who and it's SFX, well, let's just say I stopped watching Dr Who after Tom Baker's stint, what little I've seen of the new stuff reinforces the opinion that its no longer worth thinking about.
(same applies to the Torchwood guff)

The CG effects and animations are more than a bit pedestrian, if they're still not willing to put up a proper budget for the damn thing, they shouldn't try, besides, they can't cover the terrible choice of actors (well, I suppose they've equity cards, so we have to dignify them with that title) and naff stories.

The new Cattlecar Galaxica, again, the episodes I've seen of it, bored the mammaries off me, to the point I gave up after three of them. No matter how cheesy the old one is, I prefer it, its ropey FX, and its ropey&hokey morality to the new one.

I suspect it'll be the same with a new Blake's 7, after all, this is nuLabour Britain and it's being touted by a Murdoch media outlet, we can't have something glamourising rebels ffs!

I just hope and pray they never get around to doing a 'reimagined' Clangers..the Astronaut comes back, Tiny Clanger turns into a face-hugger, Astronaut gets back to earth, with the inevitable results...cue mass swanee whistles of death and gore.....

Re:Average? (2, Interesting)

MrSteveSD (801820) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215904)

Actually the effects were "state of the art". Just that they were nearly 30 years ago.


No chance. "State of the art" at the time was moving the camera instead of having the flimsy spaceship models moving around on sticks. They clearly did not move the cameras, because that would be a very smooth gliding movement, not the horrible wobble you see in the series. Another thing that struck me was how awful some of the matte paintings were. There's a backdrop in "Voices From The Past" that looks like a 3-year old's finger painting. It was all down to the crappy BBC budget I suppose. It's a shame, because the design of the Liberator is very nice.

Re:Average? (1)

Snaller (147050) | more than 6 years ago | (#23216116)

"Describing the effects as 'average' is a bit of an exaggeration - they were absolutely terrible.

Actually the effects were "state of the art". Just that they were nearly 30 years ago."

Yes they were state of the art 30 years before they made the series.

15 year old Star Trek had better effects, but then it has always seemed to me that BBC's special effects has always been really really really really lousy. Its only lately when they could afford to buy a computer and hire some render guy that some of it actually comes close to looking good.

Re:Average? (1)

OriginalArlen (726444) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215580)

There were a few fairly deep science / technology injokes and references hidden away as well. Servalan? Server / LAN? Coincidence? I don't think so.

Re:Average? (1)

MrSteveSD (801820) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215846)

Some of the acting was pretty dire too.


Part of the problem was the director/Editor I think because they seemed to keep mistakes in rather than do another take. You see Jenna fluffing her lines and looking at the camera quite a bit, but they keep it in!

Avon (Paul Darrow) did a very good job I thought.

Re:Average? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23216112)

Some of the acting was pretty dire too.
Part of the problem was the director/Editor I think because they seemed to keep mistakes in rather than do another take. You see Jenna fluffing her lines and looking at the camera quite a bit, but they keep it in!

Avon (Paul Darrow) did a very good job I thought.
In the good old days (20+ years back), when BBC2 used to show the Open University stuff, there were a couple of programmes on it dedicated to the dark arts of TV production etc, featuring Blakes 7 as a 'case study' or something.
I can remember coming across them one boring afternoon, and mirthily-making-the-yellow-water-in-my-pants at how totally amateurish the whole shebang was.

There was one sequence where the Dayna character's gun sight on her pistol had been bent at a 45 degree angle (after a bit of bad holstering, no doubt), but they carried on filming as if nowt had happened..interrupting the scene to retake a couple of fluffed lines, only, I think, because they were being filmed by the OU crew.

As commented elsewhere, it was so low a budget, I don't think they'd dare have retaken anything lest the BBC beancounters descended upon them in all their pinstriped Opera an' Proms an' Archers lovin' wrath..

Some of the acting was ham (Mr Darrow, take a bow!), some of it poor, some of it just plain wrong...despite it's flaws, in both the acting and SFX, maybe even because of them, it was enjoyable.

Great show (1)

ivano (584883) | more than 6 years ago | (#23213944)

It was the Firefly of its day. Avon was the epitome of sarcasm.

I hate remakes (1)

Hojima (1228978) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214080)

There is no sense in copying someone's work with better graphics and crappier (yet 'hip') actors. For the love of god is it so difficult to make a rip off rather than a remake? At least a rip off has a greater chance of deviating from a cookie cutter plot and having more dynamic characters. Maybe it's just because Hollywood screws over all its writers with 'creative accounting'. Hell, even Cloverfield was a Godzilla rip-off, yet is was done extremely well and with enough deviations to merit it's own new title. Don't even get me started about how much crap the comic book movie craze is. How much crap about genetic mutation can you have? The only good movie based on a super hero so far is "Spawn", and it was done way before the craze.

Re:I hate remakes (1)

linesma (869062) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214248)

I agree on the comic book movie craze. I do think that a re-imagining is a goos thing. We can take a show or a movie, especially one that was popular or attained cult status, and perpetuate them and bring them to a whole new audience. In my opinion, if a remake is done well, it pays homage to its original.

Re:I hate remakes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23214340)

What? The Spawn film was a diabolical mess, truly horrible. Bad script, bad acting, bad directing, shallow pointless script and rubbish special effects. It had it all. It pales in comparison to even the likes of Blade and it isn't even in the same league as X-Men, Spider-man and Batman begins. I know personal preference and all that be you will not convince me that dog shit tastes better than peanut butter personal preference or no.

Re:I hate remakes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23215740)

what bad script? It hardly had any cheesy punch lines or catch phrases like all the other movies. As for bad acting, I honestly was pretty convinced. Rubbish special effects? Maybe for our time, but for the money they put into it, it was pretty awesome. The one thing that was great about it was the plot. It had something clever done, and the diabolical scheme didn't go along the lines of: nothing. Seriously, how much planning did the enemies of the main characters make? Now compare it to Spiderman's 30 minute emo tantrum, all the crappy "ZOMFG 1 g0t p0w3rZ" intros, all the cheesy lines that made me want to commit vehicular homicide, and the gay character designs that rendered the special effects as useful as a limp cock, and take into account that it is more than a decade old, and you have yourself a classic.

Fond memories (1)

desmondhaynes (1269862) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214192)

From http://techwatch.reviewk.com/2008/04/blakes-7-poised-for-sky-comeback/ [reviewk.com] I feel sure that if you can remember the TV series âBlakeâ(TM)s 7â then you most probably have fond memories of it. It was, on balance, an interesting mix of adventurous television making on a very low budget. In fact, I well recall a comment made, I believe, by the producers that a single episode of âBlakeâ(TM) had about the same budget as a âStar Trekâ(TM) coffee break. So letâ(TM)s see. What do I remember. I recall flimsy sets and even flimsier acting; grandiose title music; perhaps one of the first series where the writers felt free to kill off main characters; at least one whole series of âBlakeâ(TM)s 7â with no Blake, or, for that matter, only 6 of them (I believe); the irascible ORAC; Servalan (who could forget her or her haircut?) and, of course, Avon - to mention just a few.

Thoughts (1)

maroberts (15852) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214262)

Thought the Liberator looked a cool design for a spaceship. Who would've thought that an air freshener and some washing up bottles could make a great looking spaceship. Blake was a deeply cynical space opera, with every character angling for their own objectives. I get the impression that is what Whedon tried to do with Firefly.

The new Doctor Who is a huge leap forward too, Ecclestone and particularly Tennant have been good Doctors, and the special effects have been good enough to capture the audience, which is all thats required. Some episodes (e.g. Blink, The Satan Pit and just about any other Stephen Moffat script) have been superlative.

I'm afraid that I haven't got into Battlestar Galactica. The production values are excellent, and the plot is good too, so I don't know why I can't get to love it. Maybe what's wrong is that it just takes itself too seriously.

Star Trek is much too clinical. Only the Ferengi seemed to have anything resembling a true to life approach to matters, but unfortunately they were also the comic relief.

I hope they manage to preserve the essence of Blakes 7 (idealism corrupted?) in the remake.

Re:Thoughts (2, Interesting)

mpe (36238) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214342)

Blake was a deeply cynical space opera, with every character angling for their own objectives. I get the impression that is what Whedon tried to do with Firefly.

There are plenty of parallels between Firefly and B7. Indeed Firefly might have done better had it been made outside of the US, especially considering the amount of character development involved.

Re:Thoughts (1)

PietjeJantje (917584) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215562)

I'm afraid that I haven't got into Battlestar Galactica. The production values are excellent, and the plot is good too, so I don't know why I can't get to love it.
Well, you're not alone. I loved it when watching it the first season. Then they broke it. All the plots and subplots that had been set up, and which I was anticipating to be resolved, were basically set in stone, not to be resolved, because the series were a success and it needed to be able to go for 5 years, or more. Now it's a series about nothing, or everything except the stories that mattered. They broke it for a tv-contract. The paradox is, as long as there are enough fans that don't mind watching a broken sf-show, it will remain that way, and perhaps when they stop watching, the series could proceed (before being cancelled). I wonder what would have happened with Star Wars if they had frozen it after the A New Hope, to be endlessly chased by the imperials, with endless bickering about leadership.

Blake/servalan/avon (1, Interesting)

fermion (181285) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214286)

The Battlestar Galatica remake was not great, and not better than the original. What makes it interesting is that the remake is updated so it fits with current norms, most notably that the protagonists are fight their own creations. However, in both shows most of the tension came from whatever immediate threat existed, which means that the show can continue as long as immediate threats are created. Problems are solved with guns, and at the end of the day, one person is in charge.

In Blakes 7, however, while there are monsters of the week, and problems are solved with guns, The drama depended upon the characters and the actors ability to convey tension. At first this was Blake and Avalon, and then we were lucky and go Servalan. A magical ship flying around the universe would not be as interesting if it were a simple military order. I suspect there are few females who can look dangerous in an evening gown. The show had it's reprieve when it was allowed to continued after series two. It was given a honorable end when all major characters that were not dead died in the correct fashion and in the correct order, most critically by the death of Blake at the hands of you know who. I know that deaths were left ambiguous in case the show continued, but for me it was the end, as poignant as Black Adder Goes Forth.

There must be a new idea somewhere in TV land. I fear this will ruin a perfectly happy, though corny, idea, just like the Bionic Women is now ruined. And it will be the same reason. Trying to send in a child to do an adult's job.

Re:Blake/servalan/avon (3, Interesting)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214454)

Did you even watch the last season of BSG?

Half of the last season was the build up to and trial of former President Gaius Baltar, Ph.D

The main bad-guy for the current season is President Laura Roslin.

Re:Blake/servalan/avon (1)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214768)

I would agree with you about BSG if it wasn't for the second and third seasons (I hated the first season too)... the third particularly has developed to the point that you're not even sure who the bad guys are any more... it's more like everybody/nobody.. you even get sympathetic to the plight of the cylons. It's also not about the threat of the week any more - there's a pretty strong story arc.

Bionic woman isn't bad in itself.. it's still corny but I don't think it aims for anything else. What I do hate is the flash gordon remake - can't see what they were trying to do there at all... their 'ming the merciless' is now 'ming the slightly upset but not very evil actually'.

There's a lot of scope for ruining blakes 7, but might just turn out OK. I'd be more confident if it wasn't Sky doing it, whose only solo productions so far have been terrible renditions of terry pratchet books (they contributed to BSG but it was mainly a US produciton).

Why the frickin' remake frenzy? (4, Interesting)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214332)

Dr. Who wasn't a remake, it was a revival. It's all still part of the same continuity and often quite good. I wish they'd pry the keyboard away from Davis' cold, dead hands and let other writers do more episodes. Some of the strongest episodes were penned by who was it, Moffit? Moffat? The guy who wrote "Girl in the Fireplace" and that other one with the stone angels that could kill you when you weren't looking. That's some classic who right there!

But this remake frenzy, why? After a while, nostalgia just ain't what it used to be. Galactica died an early death and so I can understand the urge to see it again. The current effort's been a mixed bag, some are in love with it and some are just shaking their heads wondering what RDM was smoking when he came up with that shit. But please, where are the new ideas?

When Babylon 5 came about, JMS didn't say "Ok, so I'm going to rip off Star Trek and put it on a space station." Hell, no. He said "Look, I'm going to borrow a bunch of shit from the best brains in the field, I'm going to mortar those bricks together with a bunch of my own ideas and then I'm going to put something on the screen that nobody's ever seen before outside of a novel." And sure enough, that's just what he did. Firefly was the same way.

I guess what the suits are thinking is "hey, this concept was good enough to get the greenlight decades ago, maybe we'll be able to make money with it now. Certainly less risky than trying to do anything completely original, right?"

I can't wait until we can start financing this stuff directly, no more need to involve fuckhead suits. Pull 10,000 geeks together on the net and we can back the damn project, $20 at a time.

Re:Why the frickin' remake frenzy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23215028)

Have you seen the ending of Blake's 7? Totally cut in it's prime. I would love to see a remake.

Re:Why the frickin' remake frenzy? (1)

Peet42 (904274) | more than 6 years ago | (#23216026)

Have you seen the ending of Blake's 7?


Yup.

Avon ducked.

Re:Why the frickin' remake frenzy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23215466)

I can't wait until we can start financing this stuff directly, no more need to involve fuckhead suits. Pull 10,000 geeks together on the net and we can back the damn project, $20 at a time.
For music, it's already done [sellaband.com] .

Re:Why the frickin' remake frenzy? (1)

exhilaration (587191) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215752)

The guy who wrote "Girl in the Fireplace" and that other one with the stone angels that could kill you when you weren't looking. That's some classic who right there!

That Stone Angels episode - it was called Blink [wikipedia.org] is some of the scariest TV I've ever seen. Definitely one of the best episodes.

Re:Why the frickin' remake frenzy? (1)

10101001 10101001 (732688) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215870)

When Babylon 5 came about, JMS didn't say "Ok, so I'm going to rip off Star Trek and put it on a space station." Hell, no. He said "Look, I'm going to borrow a bunch of shit from the best brains in the field, I'm going to mortar those bricks together with a bunch of my own ideas and then I'm going to put something on the screen that nobody's ever seen before outside of a novel." And sure enough, that's just what he did. Firefly was the same way.

Concern Firefly (well, Serenity, specifically), have you ever seen Cowboy Bebop? Oh, and I'm also pretty sure Cowboy Bebop isn't the first "space wild west confined to a solar system". In short, even if Firefly/Serenity *was* an attempt at originality and not just an attempt to clone existing works, I'd have to say it failed.

Re:Why the frickin' remake frenzy? (1)

GileadGreene (539584) | more than 6 years ago | (#23216072)

Firefly was the same way.
Ironically, Whedon has explicitly said that Firefly was heavily influenced by B7. Of course, to be fair, he also threw a bunch of other ideas into the mix. And he certainly didn't try to bank on an established brand the way the "reimaginings" do.

Obligatory Wikipedia Link (1)

mmurphy000 (556983) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214344)

For those of us on the other side of the pond, who haven't a clue who Blake is, let alone his 7: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blake's_7 [wikipedia.org] .

Wrong show to do this with (2, Interesting)

Snowspinner (627098) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214374)

This is frankly a poor idea - the sole substantial flaw in the original B7 was its production values, and that's always the flaw in aging sci-fi. The writing was basically spotless, and there's very, very little room to improve on it. B7 has aged pretty well, aside from its effects.

That's a very different situation from BSG, where the original was a good idea that was undone by pretty relentlessly cheesy aesthetics and a sense of writing that often did leave something to be desired. BSG aged poorly and rapidly. A re-imagining thus made sense there, because there was room to work and stuff to jettison as well as keep. It was possible to make a new BSG that a fan could look at and say "Wow, that's better than the original." Not all fans did, but a lot did, and that's significant.

That's going to be very, very hard to do with B7. Frankly, it'll be hard to get a casual fan to say that, little yet a hard core one.

And the other route for a SF revival - the Doctor Who/Star Trek:TNG route where you just continue in-continuity from where the old one left off is, as the article notes, closed to B7.

Making this a poor property to revive.

Re:Wrong show to do this with (1)

Peet42 (904274) | more than 6 years ago | (#23216064)

Yes. Because unlike the original "Battlestar Galactica" and "Star Trek", "Blake's Seven" never went back to battle the Nazis. That's the secret to a long-running sci-fi. ;-)

Remade by Sky... (2, Interesting)

xiox (66483) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214416)

This is being done by Sky, that channel with such great programmes, such as..... mmmm..... Simpsons repeats, Star trek repeats...

Have they actually made anything worthwhile before?

Re:Remade by Sky... (2, Interesting)

plingboot (1246808) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214494)

Colour of magic and Hogfather weren't too bad.

Re:Remade by Sky... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23215144)

But only for a given value of bad...

Ok, so TCOM and HF are ok(ish), Pterry had input into them, but I'd much have preferred a Peter Jackson and the requisite sized budget being spent on the adaptations, but at least they got done.

Still, at least they were not the HoS that is Earthsea..

To paraphrase a well known saying "One Vendeeni scout ship doesn't make an invasion.."

The point is, I suppose, Sky also produce the biggest heaps o' keich imaginable (New Gladiators &etc), their gowd to keich ratio is pretty low, so the odds are in the favour of it being keich.

But then, I'm a cynic..

Re:Remade by Sky... (1)

mrsmiggs (1013037) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214686)

Sky financed the first series of Battlestar reimaging, and they've done some good work bringing the Discworld novels to tv. When they do drama they actually tend to do it quite well, unfortunately they very rarely actually get the budget to do anything. They only have a very small share of the UK audience so it's understandable.

Re:Remade by Sky... (1)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214798)

They co-financed it, and they didn't have a lot to do with the production itself.

The discworld stuff was horrible.. basically an excuse to stick the name David Jason on the promo material (no idea why, he didn't even have a major role). They just tried to put the book on the screen, but half the jokes don't work and it really needed a good writer to write a proper screenplay for it.

The number of SAT dishes bolted onto homes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23214824)

would seem to contradict your statement
They only have a very small share of the UK audience so it's understandable
Then I remembered, there are just so many channels to choose from, that each one gets a very small percentage of the viewing people who cought up wads of dosh to Rupert Murdoch's empire every month.

Oh, thats for the footy(soccer to US readers).

Disclaimer, I don't have SKY and will never do so. In a former life, I was a printer who lost his job when the times went to Wapping.

Ironically, today,marks the closure of the News Corp Wapping site.

What goes around etc..

Re:Remade by Sky... (1)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214848)

Sky was central to the Battle Star Galactica remake - they financed the mini series and most of the first season, which was why the UK got it before the US and Canada. I enjoy the BSG remake, so the B7 remake should be worth at least the benefit of the doubt.

Re:Remade by Sky... (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215056)

Sky do produce some of their own stuff. Which is why I'm a little wary. Brainiac was quite funny. Galactica managed to impress. Apart from that, Sky co-productions have been average to poor, with things like Hex, and The Strangerers. And personally I wasn't all that taken with the Terry Pratchett adaptations.

Re:Remade by Sky... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23215220)

The Pratchett two-parters were pretty good, but the rest is pretty much rubbish (which is why I have cable). And the philistines don't even show TOS!

Re:Remade by Sky... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23215290)

Hogfather? Colour of Magic?

Re:Remade by Sky... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23215430)

AFAIK, they co-funded the first season of the Battlestar remake, along with the SciFi channel. Which is why the show originally aired in the UK slightly before the US.

So yes, Sky have done something worthwhile recently.

(Although Sky dropped out after season 1, leaving the show to be run by SciFi alone.)

Surprised nobody's mentioned this... (1)

solios (53048) | more than 6 years ago | (#23214836)

... but awhile back, both Terry Nation (who created B7) and Paul Darrow (who played Avon) talked about the idea of a revival. Not a remake a la BSG but a continuation a la the new Doctor Who. The premise I've heard talked about by both was to be that Avon - and only Avon - had survived the final scene, and, years later (20-30, I'd say!) escapes from a Federation prison and takes one last can't-win-but-try-anyway shot at it.

Think Napoleon escaping Elba and the battle of Waterloo, only hopefully without the hemorrhoids.

If this is what Sky is commissioning, and if it's done well (and with Paul Darrow and hopefully Jacqueline Pearce reprising Servalan), then it'll be the fitting finale to Blake's 7 that fans have been waiting for since the series wrapped decades ago.

The series doesn't need a remake or a reboot - what it does need is for the loose ends to be tied up.

Remember the BBC's Blake's 7? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23214870)

Nope.

Already remade it once... it was called Farscape (1)

FatRatBastard (7583) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215340)

I always thought that Farscape was Blake's 7 done right. Same basic story idea, same basic characters, much, much better execution.

Loved Blake's 7 as a kid, but saw it again a few years ago and it hadn't held up as well as my memory of it had led me to believe.

Great Show, But What About Paul Darrow? (1)

NormHome (99305) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215412)

Last I'd heard Paul Darrow (who played Avon) had bought the rights to the series from Terry Nation's estate and that he was looking to restart the series. That was at least three years ago and I haven't heard anything since. I'd love to see this back on the air but I really think that he's too old to play the same character.

No shakeycam! (1)

PhotoGuy (189467) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215442)

Here's hoping they don't ruin the remake like Battlestar Galactic did, by relying so heavily upon "shakeycam" to try and achieve a "you are there" effect. It's been done, it's not novel any more, it's just annoying and distracting. Let your writing, acting, and special effects carry themselves without making the viewers nauseous...

Thanks...

Watched the original with breathless enthusiasm (1)

vorlich (972710) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215568)

Of course the baby boomers now colonising slashdot will surely remember that Gareth wotsisname Thomas screwed the whole series when he went off on a Luvvie sabbatical to spout Welsh poetry somewhere probably in Rhondda Cynon Taf. Then the BBC shot everyone in the end - yes everyone, which I considered abuse of the audience at the time.

BSG was on around that time and to be honest, I think the re-imagineered version is quite good, if you can make a cup of tea during the scenes where characters engage in Shatneresque soul-searching. But once again, like so many American shows it is no more than a post modernist metaphor for the present day.

A bit like Doctor Who, the continuing story where you can't be a character unless your wearing Burberry or are representative of some minority group. You can tell it is Science Fiction though, cos although it is all shot in Wales, it never seems to rain...(obligatory old-git section now follows.)

Doctor who was of course much scarier in the sixties, when I were a lad, long before slasher movies Sam Rami, Tobe Hooper and Hannibal Lector - but then we were all so young and innocent then....

I wish, I wish I had said something funny or informative in this post... No wait! They should do a remake of Dr Who and the Web of Fear. Now that was classic tv and curiously coincided with England winning the World Cup in 1966.

CUE: sounds of the fourth wall breaking. With apologies to the elipsis.

Dr. Who so true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23216068)

A bit like Doctor Who, the continuing story where you can't be a character unless your wearing Burberry or are representative of some minority group.
Christ, hit the nail straight on the head you did.

Set a course for Earth, Maximum Wobble! (1)

MrSteveSD (801820) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215810)

They made a spoof a while back called "Blake's Junction 7", but I've never managed to find it anywhere. The series actually has a lot of potential. They need to make it gritty. e.g. Are they freedom fighters or terrorists? (think Aeon Flux, the Animation). It shouldn't be black and white. There could be a lot of excitement and intrigue with operations behind enemy lines etc. I suppose it all depends on the budget they get. Will there be enough money to make a decent series, or will it be wobbly spaceships again?

The worst thing they can do is aim it at kids, with Orac as a cute robot or something awful like that.

I hope they don't! (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 6 years ago | (#23215884)

I hope they don't go the BSG route. We don't need any more Star Trek Voyager character rehashes with extremely poor writing that is slipped past it's audience by confusing them with unnecessary zooms.

Much better would be to give it the Dr. Who treatment. The special effects can be total crap, but make the writing good, and do be to pretentious.

Re:I hope they don't! (3, Insightful)

Peet42 (904274) | more than 6 years ago | (#23216100)

Much better would be to give it the Dr. Who treatment. The special effects can be total crap, but make the writing good


Er, sorry, have you watched the new "Doctor Who"? The SFX are better than average, which can't be said for some/many of the scripts. I agree there are some good ones, but there are a few stinkers too.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?