Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 1:23:32 GMT
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard it was also broadcast in the last week of December for 1981 too? If that's the case, er, Merry Christmas, I guess...? What a way for the series to bow out, suitably Orwellian. It doesn't feel as though it could've gone any other way. Although, yeah, it feels a bit strange not to have Servalan in it somewhere. If not pulling the trigger then at least giving the order. Ooh, I've heard good things about Yasmin Bannerman regarding the full cast range. I haven't been able to catch any of the very recent audios, unfortunately, but I really enjoyed her turn as Roz for the Novel Adaptations. I've got high hopes, I think she'll be an excellent fit. Chris Boucher was known for many years after as "The man who killed Christmas." I was devastated by the ending (I was 12 when it aired in Australia) but it seemed a realistic way of ending the series to me. It's a near perfect piece of television imnsho. i rewatched the entire run a couple of years ago, inspired by the @makingblakes7 Twitter account, and Series D seems to spend most of its time building up to that episode. Yeah, it's like Edge of Darkness having Craven wander off into the wilderness. It's the season that committed most strongly to the idea of Avon knocking out the Federation. Trying to continue what he did with Blake, only ending up with Pyrrhic victory, after Pyrrhic victory. There was something about Blake that made their kind of resistance possible. He was an idealist in a fascist universe, he could rally people to the idea because he truly believed in it. Despite everything, I think he largely managed to stay a moral man. Smashing the Federation was always to the benefit of others, not exclusively himself. With the end of him, came the end of his kind of rebellion. Maybe. Avon might have had other ideas.
|
|
|
Post by Ela on Jul 29, 2018 3:05:25 GMT
Gouda. It's not just the moon that's made of cheese, y'know. If i put Gouda Prime(was it a cheesy ending) Ela would kill me
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 4:48:46 GMT
Chris Boucher was known for many years after as "The man who killed Christmas." I was devastated by the ending (I was 12 when it aired in Australia) but it seemed a realistic way of ending the series to me. It's a near perfect piece of television imnsho. i rewatched the entire run a couple of years ago, inspired by the @makingblakes7 Twitter account, and Series D seems to spend most of its time building up to that episode. Yeah, it's like Edge of Darkness having Craven wander off into the wilderness. It's the season that committed most strongly to the idea of Avon knocking out the Federation. Trying to continue what he did with Blake, only ending up with Pyrrhic victory, after Pyrrhic victory. There was something about Blake that made their kind of resistance possible. He was an idealist in a fascist universe, he could rally people to the idea because he truly believed in it. Despite everything, I think he largely managed to stay a moral man. Smashing the Federation was always to the benefit of others, not exclusively himself. With the end of him, came the end of his kind of rebellion. Maybe. Avon might have had other ideas. Great wee summary there.I agree that it was the only way it could end and everything was building up to it.Chris Boucher i believe was very stressed trying to do the program with little help.It is a true Classic episode and every line of dialogue is well written and well delivered.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 5:33:04 GMT
The only other time i felt chilled by a Finale was in Farscape Peacekeeper Wars when John Crichton offers the Wormhole technology and describes to the Scarrans and the Peacekeepers what to expect as everything gets sucked into the destruction.That was genuinely chilling with the Classic line of what makes peace.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 11:12:24 GMT
All the more impressive because Crichton never wanted it. Any of it. He got stuck with it because of a single act of kindness. It was never intended for war, but as he says at one point: "It is not just science! It is never just science. It's a weapon, it kills." I'm really glad we have The Peacekeeper Wars (cancelled sci-fi with a conclusive ending, huzzah!), but if we didn't, Season 4's ending rivals Blake's 7 for a serious viewer gut-punch. Like, I knew PK Wars was coming after and I was still a mess. That final shot in the boat really gets you.
If Blake's 7 ever had a spiritual successor, it was Farscape. It's a wonderful, incredible series that really doesn't take any prisoners.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 11:37:39 GMT
All the more impressive because Crichton never wanted it. Any of it. He got stuck with it because of a single act of kindness. It was never intended for war, but as he says at one point: "It is not just science! It is never just science. It's a weapon, it kills." I'm really glad we have The Peacekeeper Wars (cancelled sci-fi with a conclusive ending, huzzah!), but if we didn't, Season 4's ending rivals Blake's 7 for a serious viewer gut-punch. Like, I knew PK Wars was coming after and I was still a mess. That final shot in the boat really gets you. If Blake's 7 ever had a spiritual successor, it was Farscape. It's a wonderful, incredible series that really doesn't take any prisoners. Yep me and sisters watched “ we’re So screwed “ and we knew series had been cancelled and if it had finished with that it would have rivalled Blake definitely for best series finale ever.But truthfully the Crichton scene in Peacekeeper wars sends chills down my spine every time i watch it.Its powerful message for mankind really.Weapons do not make peace,people make peace
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 11:53:16 GMT
All the more impressive because Crichton never wanted it. Any of it. He got stuck with it because of a single act of kindness. It was never intended for war, but as he says at one point: "It is not just science! It is never just science. It's a weapon, it kills." I'm really glad we have The Peacekeeper Wars (cancelled sci-fi with a conclusive ending, huzzah!), but if we didn't, Season 4's ending rivals Blake's 7 for a serious viewer gut-punch. Like, I knew PK Wars was coming after and I was still a mess. That final shot in the boat really gets you. If Blake's 7 ever had a spiritual successor, it was Farscape. It's a wonderful, incredible series that really doesn't take any prisoners. Yep me and sisters watched we,re So screwed and we knew series had been cancelled and if it had finished with that it would have rivalled Blake definitely for best series finale ever.But truthfully the Crichton scene in Peacekeeper wars sends chills down my spine every time i watch it.Its powerful message for mankind really.Weapons do not make peace,people make peace It's a very real and tangible concept in studies of Peace and Conflict too. When you're fighting a war, it's all about winning the war, we have to "win the war". Okay, sure... But you can still win a war and lose the peace that follows. You can prove you were right and still not have enough to feed your own people. Winning the peace is its own separate process. One vital to the survival of civilisations, cultures, societies, even something as ostensibly small as individuals. Anything can be taken by war, but it can never hold it. Peace is what holds it together, makes it thrive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 11:55:06 GMT
Yep me and sisters watched we,re So screwed and we knew series had been cancelled and if it had finished with that it would have rivalled Blake definitely for best series finale ever.But truthfully the Crichton scene in Peacekeeper wars sends chills down my spine every time i watch it.Its powerful message for mankind really.Weapons do not make peace,people make peace It's a very real and tangible concept in studies of Peace and Conflict too. When you're fighting a war, it's all about winning the war, we have to "win the war". Okay, sure... But you can still win a war and lose the peace that follows. You can prove you were right and still not have enough to feed your own people. Winning the peace is its own separate process. One vital to the survival of civilisations, cultures, societies, even something as ostensibly small as individuals. Anything can be taken by war, but it can never hold it. Peace is what holds it together, makes it thrive. And only people can make the peace.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 11:58:39 GMT
It's a very real and tangible concept in studies of Peace and Conflict too. When you're fighting a war, it's all about winning the war, we have to "win the war". Okay, sure... But you can still win a war and lose the peace that follows. You can prove you were right and still not have enough to feed your own people. Winning the peace is its own separate process. One vital to the survival of civilisations, cultures, societies, even something as ostensibly small as individuals. Anything can be taken by war, but it can never hold it. Peace is what holds it together, makes it thrive. And only people can make the peace. Exactly so, just as John said. That's why we have communities. Peacefulness and good nature are what makes them work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 12:04:15 GMT
And only people can make the peace. Exactly so, just as John said. That's why we have communities. Peacefulness and good nature are what makes them work. I find whisky helps lol
|
|