There are filler episodes?
Nothing is ever really revealed in the show, but there is a strong implication that he's been captured by his own people -- or else that the Village is run by both sides' intelligence communities as part of their "Great Game," that maybe there isn't any real difference between the two.
It had McGoohan's (albeit taciturn) approval, IIRC. It was a nice follow up to the TV series, complete with its own unanswered questions in the end. Got all four issues sitting next to me in my file cabinet right now.
^Well, that's just the general lack of continuity in '60s TV
Another edit - Come to think of it, seems like there are at least four pairs of opposites here:
- activists vs pacifists
- defectors vs nationalists
- education vs recreation
- reactionists vs youngsters (the latter being more akin to radicals)
It's too bad they're doing a re-imagining, instead of new stories like they do with their other properties, but if ever there was a need to oppose dehumanization, it's now. Good luck to them.Big Finish is preparing an audio drama, due in January 2016. http://www.bigfinish.com/news/v/the-prisoner
There actually was a re-imagining of sorts back in 2009 with Jim Caviezel and Ian McKellan. An interesting take on the original, but no where near as good, IMO.
There actually was a re-imagining of sorts back in 2009 with Jim Caviezel and Ian McKellan. An interesting take on the original, but no where near as good, IMO.
I disliked it intensely. It mimicked superficial elements from the original but didn't have a shred of its substance. It substituted confusion and incoherence for mystery and enigma. It had no real philosophical stance or message. And worst of all, it gave answers to all the questions, explained all the mysteries (what Six's real name is, why he resigned, what the Village is), which is entirely and profoundly missing the point. And those explanations weren't any good anyway.
Agreed. It was definitely a pale imitation of the original, wrapped in 21st century tropes. I was concerned if they would have been able to pull it off before it aired. The original was steeped heavily in the paranoia of the Cold War era and 20th century spy-master tropes (before the word "trope" existed). That era and its ability to relate to a modern audience is lost.There actually was a re-imagining of sorts back in 2009 with Jim Caviezel and Ian McKellan. An interesting take on the original, but no where near as good, IMO.
I disliked it intensely. It mimicked superficial elements from the original but didn't have a shred of its substance. It substituted confusion and incoherence for mystery and enigma. It had no real philosophical stance or message. And worst of all, it gave answers to all the questions, explained all the mysteries (what Six's real name is, why he resigned, what the Village is), which is entirely and profoundly missing the point. And those explanations weren't any good anyway.
The original was steeped heavily in the paranoia of the Cold War era and 20th century spy-master tropes (before the word "trope" existed). That era and its ability to relate to a modern audience is lost.
Now, in this day and age with all the privacy concerns fresh in people's minds, might have been a better timeframe for such a project. A lot has changed in the past 6 years, and much of today's public psyche could be open to a more traditional "Prisoner" world view, sans trippy psychedelics.
The original was steeped heavily in the paranoia of the Cold War era and 20th century spy-master tropes (before the word "trope" existed). That era and its ability to relate to a modern audience is lost.
Now, in this day and age with all the privacy concerns fresh in people's minds, might have been a better timeframe for such a project. A lot has changed in the past 6 years, and much of today's public psyche could be open to a more traditional "Prisoner" world view, sans trippy psychedelics.
The spy stuff was just a metaphor. It was the form of the original series but not its substance. The themes of The Prisoner are about individual freedom and authoritarianism and conformity, and could apply to any era. The problem with the remake is that it only copied the forms and totally missed the substance. If it had really understood what TP was about, if it had offered the same kind of individualistic message, it could've worked in any era.
There is a certain irony in criticizing the remake for failing to conform to the original message of resisting the pressure to conform.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.