Will New Captain Scarlet be transmitted this weekend?
Moderator: Spectrum Strike Force
Andrew G. Morgan ~ CG Plumber
Cityscape 3D
Old Street, UK.
-
Aegis
- Skybase Tech
- Posts: 111
- Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 8:45 am
- Location: Skybase
-
Guest
The show is vastly superior to the original
Beg your pardon, Rat Trap, but on what exactly is that assumption based on? Can you give us a comparative between the many aspects of the two series (ex.: technical, special effects, scripts, direction, acting, etc.) so we will know in what exactly the new series is so vastly superior on? And let's not forget that the original series is 35+ years old. Let's take that into consideration.
I have a feeling there might be some arguments to debate here!
Webmaster and administrator of http://www.spectrum-headquarters.com
"This is an operational base, not a rest centre!"
-
chrisbishop
- Colonel
- Posts: 1773
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 1:00 am
- Location: Canada
Then there's the total absence of personality. Alright, so Scarlet's a kids puppet show but even the less popular Joe 90 is far better because not only do all the main characters have personalities but there's a dynamic at work between them. You've got innocent young Joe and cautious scientist/guardian Mac on one side with cynical, devious Sam Loover and Shane Weston on the other. That dynamic is amusingly exploited in episodes such as 'Double Agent', 'Business Holiday' and quite a few others. There's nothing remotely comparable in CS. Indeed, Scarlet is so hidebound by pseudo-military protocols and conventions - everyone tediously saying 'SIG' after virtually very goddamn line and formally addressing each other as 'Captain this' and 'Captain that' - that it just gives the show an incredibly stilted feel.
Slightly OT here, but I remember back in the early 80's all that embarassing fan guff about the show not having been seen for years because it was so 'dark', so 'grim', so desperately 'adult' that ITV wouldn't show it. A friend of mine wrote to the then ITV film buyer Leslie Halliwell asking if this was indeed the case. He got a response back from Halliwell basically saying 'the reason we haven't bought Scarlet is not because we consider it too violent but because we consider it to be an inferior puppet show.' So simple, so obvious! No great conspiracy, merely 'it's an inferior show.'
Having said all that, I do still like the series (honest) but I'm not going to deceive myself about its numerous flaws. You can count the good episodes of Scarlet on the fingers of one hand and considering there's 30 odd episodes that's not much of an average. As for the model work it's perfectly fine but short of a decent story it carries little impact and the repititive launch sequences quickly become dull. But 'Ah!' you say, 'didn't all the other series also rely on that?!' Well yes they did, but at least in the other series there was plenty going on besides. If you were sick of watching TB1 launch you'd know that an amusing sub-plot involving Lady P or Parker, or a bit of general humour would come along. These are the sorts of reasons why Thundebirds holds up so well 40 years on. Scarlet is much less impressive because there's not enough variety in the show. Captain Scarlet reminds me irrisistably of that phrase about being 'all dressed up with nowhere to go.' It's sad but true.
As for New Captain Scarlet, I think it improves on the old show in almost every respect. I'll start with the obvious.
1. Making the characters CG. At last everyone finally has the fluidity of movement so badly needed by the original. I mean the characters can finally interact and have hand to hand fights with each other. How cool is that?!
2. The characters actually have relationships (of a sort) with each other. Captain Blue fancies Destiny (and with her, er, attributes, who could blame him) whilst Captain Black - freed from his fate as a grim faced block of wood - is an amusingly sly and devious adversary. Of all the characters he appears to have gained most in this respect.
3) The stories: one of the greatest problems with the original is that 99% of its potential just lay there unexplored (and I'm sure this unexplored potential is the reason why Scarlet fan-fic is so popular). The new series has the freedom to reinvent and expand on all aspects of the original - such as the nature of Mysteron possession - whilst moving at a breakneck pace. Pleasingly it also retains the variety of locales from one episode to the next that distinguished the original. The other thing is the overall quality of the scripts. I haven't yet seen a story that I would in all seriousness describe as poor. Some episodes have been better than others, no question about that, but poor? Not so far.
4) None of the updated/redesigned vehicles disappoint. They look sleek and futuristic whilst still retaining a recognisable link to the original craft.
5. The look of the new show considered as a whole is quite simply stunning, a joyous blend of futuristic and retro. It's like the TV21 strip you always secretly wanted to see (but never did) finally brought vividly to life.
6. The virtual world of CG offers directors much greater flexibility in their selection of camera angles and shot sizes. Most obviously in the potential for designing visceral action scenes such as the crash of the Spectrum ship on Mars in Rat Trap but also apparent in much more subtle ways.
7. The sound: Stereo sound on the TV broadcasts and a full on 5.1 mix for the DVD's. This really will be something to see and hear on a home theatre system. Can't wait.
8. As Aegis has suggested, the quality and sophistication of CG is improving with every episode. This first half has been undeniably impressive so the potential for the second half is clearly mouth-watering, to put it mildly. I also think this is different to the original CS where the poduction techniques had pretty much reached the limits of what was then possible. By contrast, I think CG is proving itself to be something fresh and exciting with a lot of potential both in terms of spectacle and character.
9/10. Okay, you can have these two! At this moment - approx a quarter of the way through - the voice acting appears to be less memorable than the original voice work (although whether I'll feel that way once I've seen all 26 episodes - who knows?) and I'll further state that Barry Gray's music is much missed. So I'll concede points 9/10 but in every other respect I think New Captain Scarlet beats the living crap out of the original.
-
Guest
Of course, you must realise that I'm also prepared to CHALLENGE all your points too! Nothing against you, but I feel I have to defend this series than I like so much, as I thought it was in danger of suffering a great injustice. I had to give it its due. Nothing personal, Rat Trap! You just gave me the opportunity to talk out loud here, as I think there is a lot of people thinking just the same about the classic series. Be aware, though, that so far, I won't be making comparison with the new series, though. It wouldn't be honest, as I haven't seen it yet.
Bear with me as this is a LONG post.
I like all of the original shows but CS is somewhere near the bottom of the heap.
Whoa! That’s hard judgment, to say that the series was at the bottom of the heap?! How in Heaven could it have survived 35 plus years and still be remembered and loved today as it was all those years ago? It is largely recognized that right after “Thunderbirds”, CS was the second best and most loved Supermarionation show created by Gerry and Sylvia Anderson. To that point, I suggest you check the list of 100 GREATEST KIDS' TV SHOWS, as compiled by Channel 4 – which is a popular poll that was run in UK some times ago. Thunderbirds ranks at 24, and Captain Scarlet at 51. And there's another poll, on the Sci-Fi lists site which lists it at the 65th position for old and 74th position for new on the TOP 100 SCI-FI TV SHOWS. Still in the top 100 after all these years. That can hardly be said from a series who, by some people’s judgment is ‘at the bottom of the heap’.
Even by the standards of Anderson's other series it's a terribly formulaic show which brings almost nothing new to the table.
Let us remind us all that the series, just like “Thunderbirds” or “Stringray” before it, was a kid show, so yes, formulaic, like all other TV series for kids in that era – maybe even by today’s standard, come to think of it. While formulaic, I will agree with that, Captain Scarlet DID bring something new to the table. It was different from the previous shows created by the Anderson. It dared to be darker, gritty, and more serious than its predecessors, and announced the style, and dark atmosphere that would be used in years to come in the live-action UFO and the first season of the Space: 1999 series. It introduced, for a kid TV show, the concept of war against an alien, invisible enemy, that can kill people, destroy things, recreate them as near indestructible agents of destruction and use them against the Earthmen. It was a series that presented the idea that the alien WEREN’T the ones responsible for that war, but that it was because of the gesture of one person from Earth who caused it all, and that it was now up to an international organization to save us all. That was a pretty serious subject - and the idea was certainly as novel as a family getting together to perform rescue missions – and as fascinating. So fascinating that a few modern books today would reprise the same idea of an international military force fighting against Terror – a friend of mine pointed a few interesting details to me concerning the Rainbow Six book, written by Tom Clancy. If you think the book had some novel ideas, check again, and compare it with a certain 1968 TV series from UK…
In fact Scarlet's po-faced seriousness works against it because even in the grimmest of scenarios there is always humour. […]Then there's the total absence of personality.
Not much humour in it, I agree – but then again, it was a dark series. And does a TV show needs to be humorous to be classified as ‘good’? And it didn’t have time to be too humorous either. Like Thunderbirds suffered from the hour-long imposed on each episode (there’s so many TB1 or TB2 launches you can watch…), CS suffered from the too-short half-hour slot allotted for each episode. This is here a series who would have greatly improved if more time have been given to each of its episode. Like in Thunderbirds, that would have given time for us to know more of the characters, who, I concede that, were not very defined during that half-hour. Yet, we all got to learn that Scarlet is impulsive, even arrogant, too sure of himself, perhaps of his new-found power of rejuvenation. That Colonel While is a force to be reckoned with, a sophisticated man, who imposed respect and sometimes has a strange sense of humour, that Captain Blue is extremely loyal and that there is ‘a thing’ between him and Symphony Angel. (This is also to answer comments about ‘characters being able to have a relationship’) The Mysterons and Captain Black – with his ‘stone face’ – which personally I think gave the character at the same time a tragic and menacing feel - were the unknown figures in the show, but then again, that probably what gave the series that mysterious feel (no pun intended) that fans – because there WERE fans – loved.
Slightly OT here, but I remember back in the early 80's all that embarassing fan guff about the show not having been seen for years because it was so 'dark', so 'grim', so desperately 'adult' that ITV wouldn't show it. A friend of mine wrote to the then ITV film buyer Leslie Halliwell asking if this was indeed the case. He got a response back from Halliwell basically saying 'the reason we haven't bought Scarlet is not because we consider it too violent but because we consider it to be an inferior puppet show.' So simple, so obvious! No great conspiracy, merely 'it's an inferior show.'
If there were so much ‘guff’ about it, and if so many people were complaining about its return, or lack of, then WHY didn’t anyone amongst the powers that be listened to what the customers ASKED for? Read the like written by Halliwell: “Because WE CONSIDER IT to be an inferior puppet show.” BY THEIR STANDARDS, and obviously, not EVERYONE use the same scale of appreciation. For example, I have a book here, sadly in French, l’Encyclopédie de la Science-Fiction (Science-Fiction Encyclopedia), which has an entry on Gerry and Sylvia Anderson, and which says this specifically for Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons:
“The quality of the animation and the puppets expression makes “Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons” regarded as a perfect success.”
I'm not going to deceive myself about its numerous flaws.[…] You can count the good episodes of Scarlet on the fingers of one hand and considering there's 30 odd episodes that's not much
On one hand, I can count episodes I consider not too good. And again, it’s a matter of appreciation. The scripts had flaws, yes, and we are still debating them in other topics, so I won’t mention them here because it would be repetitive. But ALL series have flaws when you look at them closely. And that would include the new CGI series.
As for the model work it's perfectly fine but short of a decent story it carries little impact and the repititive launch sequences quickly become dull.
“Thunderbirds”, “Stingray”, “Fireball XL5”, even “Joe 90” and “Secret Service” have such repetitive sequences. That’s one common flaw of TV series for kids. I watched “Grandizer” – an early manga series on TV - when I was a kid, and they had such repetitive launching sequences too. “Thunderbirds” had subplots, because it was one hour long… But as I said earlier, some people would regard that hour-long as a flaw to the series. As for the CS script – I would not complain about it. For example, the plot for the pilot and its follow-up was superbly dramatic, and many episodes have script that were equally riveting, and some of them very original. “Big Ben strikes again”, “White as Snow”, “Operation Time”, “Manhunt”, The Lunarville Trilogy, and I can go on… With all their 'flaws', there were good scripts.
These are the sorts of reasons why Thundebirds holds up so well 40 years on.
And not Scarlet…?!
Scarlet is much less impressive because there's not enough variety in the show.
See all the answers above.
Captain Scarlet reminds me irrisistably of that phrase about being 'all dressed up with nowhere to go.' It's sad but true.
I will be sarcastic here: so much true it inspired its creator to create an entire new series, using nearly the same characters, same concept, same background – although with totally new stories and updated it to today’s standard for a new generation of fans – making CS fully enter the 21st Century? Somebody better tells Gerry he’s making a BIG MISTAKE!!!!
As for New Captain Scarlet, I think it improves on the old show in almost every respect. I'll start with the obvious.
As I said, I will not comment on the new series and compare it with the classic one yet, as, living in Canada, I haven’t had the chance to see it. But a friend of mine will soon lend me tapes, and I will FINALLY be able to give my two cents about this.
With no need to make any comparison as yet, however, there is a couple of details I’d like to point out and based of what I know so far of the two series. I can elaborate latter on other points:
1) Special effects: The CGI is surely a motivating aspect of the new series, and I’m all for it. I was thrilled to learn that it would be used for a new Captain Scarlet series, way back when it was only talked about. I’m also terribly aware that this new technology has been around for only a few years, and that it’s still perfecting itself. But did the new Captain Scarlet series actually bring
SOMETHING new to the CGI technology? In the case of the Captain Scarlet series, special effect were created with small models by the ingenuity of Derek Meddings – who became such a master that his arts would be used and seen years after in the James Bond and Superman movie series. To this day, models are used for movies – often combined with the craft of CGI FX – remember the explosion of the White House in the movie Independence Day, for example…
2) Characters: see above.
3) Stories: well, I can’t argue that a lot has been left unexplored, but the script, as I said, were still very good. As for the new series, I’m sure you’ll find people ready to point out that a lot is left - or will be left – unanswered with it too. It’s a common lot to many series, I’m afraid. But as you said, they new series can ‘explore and expend’. My concern, though, it that it might NOT HAVE THE TIME to do so. Given the fact that if another season would have been added to the classic series, maybe a lot of questions would have been answered. So if the new series should contend itself with its first 26 episodes, and be left hanging at the end of the 26th, could it be possible that a lot of answers be left unanswered as well? That’s a question for the future.
4) Vehicles: Agreed. I like the new designs – they’re nice updated versions of the classic vehicles which inspired them.
5-6-7 and 8 bring us to the point on 1. And I agree too, but with a small note that in 1968, they use what technology existed, and did a wonderful work at it, even by today’s standard. Not to be compared with today’s technology, but CGI is a nice and very welcomed improvement. As for the sound, mono only existed in 1968 – they added Dolby surround to the classic DVD set, though, and it’s quite good. Though I suspect it might not be quite as good as the new series will probably sound when I’ll be able to view the upcoming set!
9) Voices: could be, once the actors will probably get more comfortable with their roles… I have to make a note that for the classic series, the voice artists had to be extremely good, because it is quite obvious that they couldn’t rely on the facial or body expression of the puppets to convey emotions… So the actors had to convey that in their voice impersonation to make it work. Considering that CGI makes it possible for animators to give their characters facial and body expressions with the new series, it could be felt that the voice is less important today? I hope for the first possibility, though.
10) Can’t comment. Haven’t heard the new music. But I did like the music and score of the classic series. Except for that dreadful song at the end… sung by the Spectrums…
So with all those reasons above, I think you can say I don’t think that the New series beats the living crap out of the original…
There’s still life in the old guys…
Webmaster and administrator of http://www.spectrum-headquarters.com
"This is an operational base, not a rest centre!"
-
chrisbishop
- Colonel
- Posts: 1773
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 1:00 am
- Location: Canada
To my mind, the new series is comparable with the old one, and very good in its own right. But 'vastly superior'? I don't think so.
I like the new series very much. I LOVED the original series. Having said that, I can see the flaws in the original series - if it comes to it, I could see the flaws when I first watched it, on its original transmission. I can also see the flaws in the new series - and you know what? They are almost the same flaws - occasionally clonky scripting, occasionally less-than-perfect animation, slightly dodgy acting. They matter very little to me, unless I'm the mood to be ultra-picky.
I'll make direct reference to only one of the points mentioned by Rat Trap - the humour in Thunderbirds, et al. I wasn't a particularly sophisticated child - we weren't, back in the 60s, compared with children of the same age now - but even so, sometimes, the humorous scenes made me cringe. There was an episode of Stingray, in which Phones was togged up in a kilt, dancing a version of a Highland fling. I couldn't watch, I was so embarrassed. Later, as an adult watching the same episode, I just smiled and thought "how sweet", but at the time, as a member of the target audience, I thought it was awful. So I was delighted when Scarlet arrived on the scene, and dispensed with the more obvious attempts at humour, in favour of the more subtle. In White as Snow, Col.White catches Scarlet with his feet up on the control desk, and says "Please don't get up." Now, that's humour appropriate to the sombre nature of the series...
-
hazel
- Cloudbase Captain
- Posts: 903
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:15 pm
- Location: London, UK
I used to squirm at the 'light-hearted jollifications' at the end of each episode of Thunderbirds. I particularly remember Scott returning from somewhere in Scotland with a basket of eggs from the local farmer and some remarks about milking the cows... Even then I didn't think it was funny - and I don't even think it's cute now.
I think what humour there is in CS was more sophisticated and underplayed - and yes - Scarlet himself was usually as funny as a wet Bank Holiday Weekend, but even he had his moments. Much of it came from the performances of the voice artists, which were often very subtle in their deliveries. Even the intentionaly funny bits - like Blue's singing in the shower in 'Flight 104' - weren't obviously played for laughs, but did, I think, show us something of the relationship between the partners - purely by their dialogue.
The new CS has had a few moments like that - and I hope it will have more. People are here championing the cause of a Kids' TV show first broadcast more than 35 years ago - that in itself speaks for the quality of the show and the impact it had on the original audience.
Will anyone be doing the same for the CGI version 35 years from now?
-
Marion
- Cloudbase Captain
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:21 pm
I've heard a theory presented that the target audience for CS wasn't young children, but those who had grown up with Thunderbirds etc. Therefore the more subtle humor and 'dark' material was appropriate as these were older children and perhaps teens.
I always appreciated the humor of CS, especially Colonel White and his sarcasm. Yet cringed at Thunderbirds, and can't even watch Stingray. Too cloying and trying to hard with the humor. Must have been a pretty sophisticated 8 year old.
Brendan Behan
My fanfic100 table
-
Sage
- Major
- Posts: 764
- Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:06 pm
- Location: Scarlet's ancestral stomping ground
Aegis says:
we've also got quite a female following too which is very cool.
You sound surprised, Aegis, can I ask why?
A lot of females liked the original series too - and whereas I am not overly concerned with the mechanical hardware (in either version of the series) - I care very much about what happens to the characters - in both versions.
Although I am wary of making sweeping statements about such subjects - I wonder if this reflects some deeper 'gender-based' reaction to things? The males like the machinery and the car chases - and the females like the inter-play of personalities?
I'll get lynched....
-
Marion
- Cloudbase Captain
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:21 pm
However ... it wasn't the hardware or the car chases. It was the explosions! Every one of them earned the exclamation: "Cool!"
- J.M. Straczynski (during commentary on ‘The Fall of Centauri Prime’)
-
Elentari
- Cloudbase Captain
- Posts: 352
- Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 6:05 am
- Location: Australia
I never saw Thunderbirds as all that funny as a child - at least not as far as the Tracys were concerned. Of course Parker and Lady P were a different matter! I liked the show but when they focussed too long on the rescues I got very bored. I STILL find some of those episodes boring which is why I haven't bought the DVDs (aside from the two movies).
I was so hooked on Fireball XL5 I didn't mind the corny aspects (or worse - the terribly fanciful 'scientific' storylines). Paul Maxwell as Steve Zodiac had a wonderful way of delivering the lines - like he really enjoyed it but had his tongue firmly in cheek playing Steve! I still love the show very much ... and what I do like easily enables me to excuse anything cringeworthy.
Stingray I also liked and these days there's still much to admire in the costumes, set etc. Even Phones in a kilt didn't put me off.
But Scarlet...it was the best - the subtle humour, the music, the whole setup. It had a level of sophistication that (to me) the others lacked, and that's why I think it has stood the test of time. The acting really brought the characters to life, so that the fact they were puppets was irrelevant. The hardware, costumes, sets etc may have been the best for their times and might be considered dated or whatever now but none of that mattered then...and I don't think it matters now. The show is a classic.
My feelings about the new show is that it is so different from the original, especially in the way the characters' personalities have been defined, that to me it's a kind of 'alternate' Captain Scarlet. I think they can co-exist OK without any problems. There's much more I'd like to say on the show but for the moment I will only say this: It's not bad in terms of effects, hardware etc. Scripts - some good bits, some not so good. Re how the characters move compared to the puppets - I've had a few laughs (and it probably wasn't supposed to be funny). Especially watching Green's father prance about - very silly. I'm not sure bringing more mobility to the characters in terms of walking was so great, but how they interact with machinery (pushing buttons, picking up stuff etc) is very well done. With the exception of whoever is playing Captain Black (he's great!), I think the acting is FAR inferior to the original show (and in the first episodes, Captain Blue is especially cringeworthy!) I don't think easing to the roles is a valid excuse - it didn't seem necessary for the original actors. Some of the current ones seem to be known for their voice-over work so the acting should be better than it is! The only word I'd use to describe the music is: woeful. The New CS is watchable and interesting and it would be nice to have them on DVD so when the set comes out I'll buy it. But for me, big improvements in the acting and storylines would be needed to raise this show to the level of 'classic' like the original Captain Scarlet was...and still is.
- J.M. Straczynski (during commentary on ‘The Fall of Centauri Prime’)
-
Elentari
- Cloudbase Captain
- Posts: 352
- Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 6:05 am
- Location: Australia
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests