• daisy [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    They literally don’t view women as human, as other humans with internal lives greater or equal to their own.

    Last sunday I did a Red-Dwarf-while-high rewatch marathon, and was pleasantly suprised by how well S2E6 aged. Lister calling Rimmer out for not understanding your exact point was nice to see again.

      • daisy [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s a really fun ride! The humour can be a bit crude at times but it’s aged surprisingly well. I recommend just going in blind. This is the kind of show where continuity is just a suggestion to be cheerfully jettisoned if it gets in the way of a good joke.

        Some people say it doesn’t get good until season 3 with the permanent addition of a new cast member, but I think the first two seasons were also great in their own way. It’s funny throughout. There’s just a lot of changes throughout regarding character dynamics that keeps the humour fresh. It’s not the same people doing the same things for years on end.

        • WittyProfileName2 [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago
          spoilers

          What’s your take on seasons 6-8?

          I know a lot of fans hate the big setting changes that happen in the first episodes of series 6 and 8, and how largely they changed Kochanski’s character.

          • daisy [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think main-cast changes are vital in a long-running comedy show. New character dynamics are new opportunities for jokes and plotlines. Otherwise you get The Simpsons: stale, stagnant, predictable.